19950169 Ver 1_Complete File_19950308

D F_ i-n-*
co 95/G2
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
February 14, 1995
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Buncombe County, Replacement of Bridge No. 76
and the Swannanoa River on US 25, Federal Aid
State Project No. 8.1841001, TIP No. B-1070.
f ,,? ff1
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
- 01 ISSUE
over Southern Railway
Project BRM-5000(6),
Attached for your information are three copies of the project planning
report for the subject project. The project is being processed by the
Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance
with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an
individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the
Corps of Engineers. The provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of
these regulations will be followed in the construction of the project.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE
document to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
We also anticipate that comments from the North Carolina Wil life
Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be required prior to authorization by the
Corps of Engineers. By copy of this letter and attachment, NCDOT hereby
requests NCWRC review. NCDOT requests that NCWRC forward their comments to
the Corps of Engineers.
lell
.AF W. February 14, 1995
Page 2
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call
Mr. Doug Huggett at 733-3141.
VncerelSi ,
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/dvh
cc: w/attachment
Mr. Robert Johnson, COE-Asheville
Mr. David Yow, NCDEHNR, WRC
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. John Parker, NCDEHNR, DCM
w/out attachment
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith Jr., PE, Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W. D. Smart, PE, Division 13 Engineer
Ms. Julie Hankins, PE, Planning and Environmental Branch
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch
r
US 25
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway
and the Swannanoa River
Buncombe County
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5000(6)
State Project 8.1841001
B-1070
it
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
FINAL SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
AND APPROVAL
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
q.29-74 ' V.
?? -
Date H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT ZLI ' i,
Date Nice as Graf , P.
j°/Division Administrator, FHWA
Ve4 n N. Larson
?,,, Regional Administrator, FHWA
US 25
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway
and the Swannanoa River
Buncombe County
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5000(6)
State Project 8.1841001
B-1070
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
FINAL SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
October, 1994
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Vie $I 111 I I,,,I,
•.•`??H CAR01
•. 4 ••,
. ? •?ttssrpy? '? ,
SE
4eA. H n s, P. E. 18496
oject Planning Engineer
tiG NEE '?5
Wayne E iott
Bridge Replacement Project Unit Head d(
Lubin Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
US 25
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway
and the Swannanoa River
Buncombe County
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5000(6)
State Project 8.1841001
B-1070
Bridge No. 76 on US 25 (McDowell Street) in the City of Asheville,
Buncombe County, is included in the 1994-2000 Transportation Improvement
program as a candidate for replacement under the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program. The location of the project is shown in Figure 1.
The existing bridge is in poor condition and in need of replacement.
This project is intended to improve safety and traffic operations along
US 25, a major urban arterial route, by replacing the existing structure
with a new bridge. As described in this report, construction of this
project will not produce significant impacts to the environment and,
therefore, is considered a categorical exclusion according to Federal
Guidelines 23 CFR 771.115(b)(9).
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on preliminary structural review, traffic conditions in the
area, and proximity of-buildings, Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway and
the Swannanoa River should be replaced immediately east of the existing
bridge, as shown in Figure 2.
The vehicular travelway will be 52 feet wide at the north end and 76
feet wide at the south end, providing four through travel lanes across the
structure and two additional turn lanes at the southern end. The proposed
1256-foot long structure will accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists.
Approach work will extend approximately 1000 feet on the northern approach
to the bridge and about 550 feet south of the replacement structure to tie
the bridge into the existing roadway.
The grade of the proposed structure will be two to ten feet higher
than the existing grade. This increase in elevation is needed to provide
a minimum vertical clearance of 23 feet over Southern Railway's main
tracks.
Traffic will be maintained on-site during the construction period by
utilizing a phased construction technique. Four travel lanes will be
maintained during construction.
The estimated cost, based on current prices, is $10,787,000,
including $ 2,287,000 for right of way. The estimated cost of the project
for right of way and construction, as shown in the 1994-2000
Transportation Improvement Program, is $ 9,775,000.
2
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid and
minimize environmental impacts. No wetlands are anticipated to be
impacted by implementation of this project. Best Management Practices
will be used to minimize impacts of construction activities.
This project must be reviewed under Section 26a of the Tennessee
Valley Authority (TVA) Act. The final bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of
the effects of the replacement structure on the 100-year flood elevation,
and notice of compliance with the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 will
be forwarded to TVA for approval under Section 26a.
A letter of comment has been obtained from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), who concurs with the project as
proposed. The NCWRC concurs that the existing pier in the.Swannanoa River
should be removed to the bottom of.the riverbed.
Due to the high traffic volumes on US 25, consideration will be given
to marking the pavement on the replacement bridge deck to provide for
widened outside travel lanes to better accommodate bicycle safety. When
there are high volumes of traffic, AASHTO recommends outside lanes widened
to 14 feet or more to accommodate safe use by bicyclists. In addition,
drainage grate covers used on their replacement bridge deck will be
bicycle-safe.
Several features will be incorporated into the design of the project
to help minimize impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed project on
historic properties. The specific mitigation measures have been
formulated and agreed upon in consultation with the State Historic
Preservation Officer and the City of Asheville. These commitments are as
follows:
(1) Prior to demolition, Bridge No. 76 and the exterior of the Jeanne
Leigh Harrison House shall be recorded in accordance with a specified
Historic Structure and Landscape Recordation Plan. A copy of the
original construction plans for Bridge No. 76 shall be transmitted to
the State Historic Preservation Office.
(2) To help mitigate the effects of removing the McDowell Street Viaduct,
a historic structure, the design of the replacement structure will
incorporate a bridge rail which is similar to the existing pierced
rail. This rail will be similar to the "Texas-type" rail, which
consists of a series of pierced rectangular openings. The rail will
be of sufficient height to accommodate pedestrians without attachment
of an additional handrail.
(3) Plain outriggers will be provided along both sides of the replacement
structure. The bridge will be constructed with conduits so that
lighting fixtures can be placed atop the outriggers and wired.
(4) Appropriate lighting fixtures, which will be similar to "Evanston"
lighting fixtures, will be mounted on the outriggers and wired for
use. The City of Asheville will be responsible for maintaining the
lighting fixtures and securing any metered service for the lights.
3
(5) The rock wall, which is adjacent to St. Dunstans Circle and located
within the St. Dunstans Historic District, will be protected during
construction. The design plans will include the location of the rock
wall, and a prescribed 20-foot buffer zone will be delineated on the
plans to instruct the contractor to avoid this area.
(6) A retaining wall will be constructed along the northern approach to
the structure to reduce the amount of cutting required into the
hillside at the St. Dunstans Historic District and minimize impact to
the St. Dunstans Historic District in the vicinity of the rock wall.
The final treatment and/or finish of the retaining wall will be
developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Office.
(7) The slope between the buffer zone limits (at the top of the hill at
St. Dunstans Circle) and the top of the retaining wall will be
re-vegetated to maintain the district's residential character.
The southern approach to the replacement bridge is located within the
Biltmore Village Locally Designated Historic District. A Certificate of
Appropriateness must be obtained from the Historic Resources Commission of
Asheville and Buncombe County (HRC) for the final design of the project
prior to construction. This project has been coordinated with the HRC.
Informal coordination with the North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology and the State Historic Preservation Office indicates no
further archaeological investigations are needed. However, the State
Historic Preservation Officer will be given an opportunity to further
review the archaeological aspects of the project to determine whether an
intensive survey should be undertaken. If necessary, the survey will be
accomplished prior to construction.
Best Management Practices will be utilized during the construction
phase of the project in order to minimize impacts to water resources.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway and the Swannanoa River is
located on US 25 (McDowell Street) south of Asheville Central Business
District. On the northern end of the bridge, there are four 10-foot lanes
(see Figure 3). The bridge flares to five 10-foot lanes at the southern
end to provide a left turn lane at the intersection of US 25 and Lodge
Street. Bridge No. 76 is a 27-span, 1390-foot long, reinforced concrete
structure. The clear roadway width on the structure is 40 feet with
5-foot sidewalks on both sides. Originally constructed in 1927, the
bridge is not posted with load limits.
The existing horizontal alignment is poor with a 17-degree curve on
the northern approach; this is excessively sharp for the operating speeds
observed on US 25. The southern approach consists of a congested,
signalized intersection with much more limited operating speeds. The
vertical alignment just beyond the south end of the bridge is poor; a sag
vertical curve limits the operating speed and sight distance at this
4
location. The north approach to the structure has 5-foot grassed
shoulders, and the south approach consists of curb and gutter with 5-foot
sidewalks on each side. The speed limit through the project area is
35 MPH.
The condition of this bridge has deteriorated to the point at which
rehabilitation is not considered feasible. The sufficiency rating for
this bridge is 30.8, as compared to 100.0 for a new structure. The NCDOT
Bridge Inspection Report notes the poor condition of the longitudinal
girders and bent caps with some shifting of the superstructure. The
estimated remaining life is 15 years.
US 25 (McDowell Street) is classified as an other urban principal
arterial route in the Statewide Functional Classification System. This
route serves approximately 25,300 vehicles per day. The traffic volumes
in 2015 are estimated to be 44,700 vehicles per day (VPD).with 2% truck
tractor semi-trailers (TTST) and 3% dual-tired trucks (DT). School bus
crossings total 37 per day.
In the three-year period from November 1989 through October 1992,
there were twenty-one reported accidents in the project vicinity. Two
occurred on the bridge and three occurred in the vicinity of the bridge.
Four of the five accidents at or on the bridge were merging or
weaving-related collisions. One involved northbound vehicles that were
possibly affected by the degree of curve just beyond the north end of the
bridge. Fifteen accidents occurred at the intersection of US 25A (Lodge
Street) and US 25 (McDowell Street), and these accidents involved failure
to yield, following too close, and exceeding a safe speed.
Land use in the project vicinity is primarily urban industrial and
commercial. Development is dense and is confining to bridge
reconstruction. At the southern end of the bridge, the main entrance to
the Biltmore Estate forms a leg of the intersection with Lodge Street, All
Souls Crescent, and McDowell Street. The Biltmore Estate ticket office,
parking area, and several large trees are adjacent to the southern end of
the bridge.
Several overhead utility lines cross the bridge at its midpoint, and
a transmission tower is situated close to the southwest end of the bridge.
Seven railroad tracks cross under the bridge, including spurs and
thru lines. The vertical clearance over Southern Railway's main tracks is
20'-10". A small brick building adjacent to the bridge near its midpoint
contains railroad signal relay equipment.
At the south end of the bridge, several buildings are directly
adjacent to the bridge. Vertical geometry of the existing bridge is
controlled by topography and railroad track clearance requirements. The
track nearest the south bridge abutment has been abandoned, permitting
some shortening of the replacement bridge.

5
IV. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 76 should be replaced. The centerline of the replacement
structure will be approximately 60 feet east of its present location, as
shown in Figure 2.
The recommended structure is 1256 feet long and will provide a
vehicular travelway which varies in width from 52 feet at the north end to
76 feet at the south end. This structure will provide four to six 12-foot
lanes across the bridge with two feet of lateral clearance on each side.
A 4-foot raised sidewalk will be provided on both sides of the replacement
structure to accommodate pedestrians.
Approach work will extend approximately 1000 feet on the north
approach to the bridge and about 550 feet south of the replacement
structure to tie the new bridge into the existing roadway. The typical
section of the approach roadway will consist of four 12-foot lanes with
curb and gutter on the north approach. On the south approach to the
bridge, the typical section will have curb and gutter and include six
12-foot lanes, two of which will be turn lanes.
The alignments of St. Dunstans Road and Short McDowell, located
immediately north of the replacement bridge, will be improved at their
intersection with McDowell Street to form a signalized intersection. Turn
lanes will be provided. Two turn lanes will also be provided at the Lodge
Street/McDowell Street intersection at the south end of the project.
Four-foot sidewalks will be provided on both sides of the roadway
from Lodge Street to St. Dunstans Road to accommodate pedestrians. A
pedestrian crosswalk will be provided at the signalized, realigned
intersection of St. Dunstans Road, Short McDowell Street, and McDowell
Street, for pedestrians to access a 5-foot sidewalk on the west side of
the roadway leading from Short McDowell Street to Asheville High School.
The design speed of the roadway approaches will be approximately
35 MPH.
The grade of the roadway on the replacement structure will be two to
ten feet higher than the existing grade. The increase in elevation of the
bridge is required to provide a minimum vertical clearance of 23 feet over
Southern Railway. A minimum vertical clearance of 19'-11" will be
provided over a historical railroad track near the Southern Railway
Freight Depot. These clearances have been coordinated with Southern
Railway.
Due to the high traffic volumes on US 25, consideration will be given
to marking the pavement on the replacement bridge deck to provide for
widened outside travel lanes to better accommodate bicycle safety. When
there are high volumes of traffic, AASHTO recommends outside lanes widened
to 14 feet or more to accommodate safe use by bicyclists. Wider outside
lanes may be accommodated by decreasing the width of the inside travel
lanes in each direction of travel. In addition, drainage grate covers
used on the bridge deck will be bicycle-safe.
6
Traffic will be maintained on-site during the construction period by
utilizing a phased construction technique. Four travel lanes of the new
bridge and associated approach roadway will be initially constructed
immediately east of the existing structure. Traffic will be shifted to
the new bridge, and the old structure will be removed in its entirety.
The new bridge will be extended westward to provide adequate lateral
clearance and sidewalks across the bridge and additional turn lanes at the
south end of the structure.
The grade of the replacement structure will be approximately the same
as the existing bridge. No special hydraulic considerations govern the
height of the replacement bridge over the Swannanoa River since the height
requirements over the railroad and adjacent topography dictate a grade
higher than the 100-year floodplain elevation.
Several features will be incorporated into the design.of the project
to help minimize impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed project on
historic properties. The features are described below, and additional
information and design details are included in the Section 4(f)
evaluation, which is included as Section IV of this report.
(1) Prior to demolition, Bridge No. 76 and the exterior of the Jeanne
Leigh Harrison House shall be recorded in accordance with a specified
Historic Structure and Landscape Recordation Plan. A copy of the
original construction plans for Bridge No. 76 shall be transmitted to
the State Historic Preservation Office.
(2) To help mitigate the effects of removing the McDowell Street Viaduct,
a historic structure, the design of the replacement structure will
incorporate a bridge rail which is similar to the existing pierced
rail. This rail will be similar to the "Texas-type" rail, which
consists of a series of pierced rectangular openings. The rail will
be of sufficient height to accommodate pedestrians without attachment
of an additional handrail.
(3) Plain outriggers will be provided along both sides of the replacement
structure. The bridge will be constructed with conduits so that
lighting fixtures can be placed atop the outriggers and wired.
(4) Appropriate lighting fixtures, which will be similar to "Evanston"
lighting fixtures, will be mounted on the outriggers and wired for
use. The City of Asheville will be responsible for maintaining the
lighting fixtures and securing any metered service for the lights.
(5) The rock wall, which is adjacent to St. Dunstans Circle and located
within the St. Dunstans Historic District, will be protected during
construction. The design plans will include the location of the rock
wall, and a prescribed 20-foot buffer zone will be delineated on the
plans to instruct the contractor to avoid this area.
(6) A retaining wall will be constructed along the northern approach to
the structure to reduce the amount of cutting required into the
hillside at the St. Dunstans Historic District and minimize impact to
the St. Dunstans Historic District in the vicinity of the rock wall.
The final treatment and/or finish of the retaining wall will be
developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Office.
(7) The slope between the buffer zone limits (at the top of the hill at
St. Dunstans Circle) and the top of the retaining wall will be
re-vegetated to maintain the district's residential character.
The division engineer concurs with the recommended method of
replacement.
Consideration was given to replacement of the bridge at its existing
location using a phased construction technique to maintain traffic during
construction. During the preliminary design of this alternative, it was
determined the existing bridge is not structurally sound if it is removed
in phases. Therefore, traffic cannot be maintained on the existing bridge
if the structure is removed one half at a time. (Traffic must be
maintained through the project area during construction due to the high
traffic volumes carried by US 25.) For these reasons, replacement of the
bridge at its existing location using a phased construction method is not
feasible.
The construction of a temporary bridge immediately adjacent to the
existing bridge to maintain traffic through the project area during
construction was also considered. This would allow the new bridge to be
reconstructed at its existing location. Due to the lengthy temporary
structure which would be required and the associated cost, this alternate
is not considered prudent. Such a temporary detour structure would
result in unnecessary impacts to historic properties within the project
corridor.
Construction of a 4-lane temporary bridge to the east of the existing
bridge would cost approximately $3.5 million, excluding the cost of right
of way. The temporary bridge and associated roadway approaches would
result in greater impacts to the St. Dunstans Historic District, including
the destruction of the Jeanne Leigh Harrison House and the removal of the
rock wall and overlook and St. Dunstans Circle in the vicinity of
46 St. Dunstans Circle. This would also require the removal of the
McDowell Street Viaduct.
Construction of a 4-lane temporary bridge to the west of the existing
bridge to maintain traffic during construction would also cost about
$3.5 million, excluding right of way costs. With this construction
scenario, the following historic resources would be impacted: the
Asheville High School Power House, the McDowell Street Viaduct, the Jeanne
Leigh Harrison House, the Southern Railway Freight Depot, and the Biltmore
Estate National Historic Landmark.
8
Requirements set forth by the U. S. Department of Transportation Act
of 1966 do not allow the use of historic properties, which are eligible
for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places, for a project
if other alternatives exist which minimize or avoid such impacts. The
recommended alternate avoids and/or minimizes impacts to these historic
properties. An alternative which utilizes a temporary bridge to maintain
traffic during construction would result in more severe impacts to
historic properties within the Area of Potential Effects than the
preferred alternative.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
US 25.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
IV. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated cost of the recommended improvements, which includes
10% for mobilization and miscellaneous items, is as follows:
Structure $ 5,429,000
Roadway Approaches 1,111,000
Structure Removal 530,000
Retaining Walls 330,000
Engineering & Contingencies (15%) 1,100,000
Right of Way, Utilities 2,287,000
Total $10,787,000
V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact.
Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic
operations.
The project is considered to be a federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not effect the quality of human life or
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
9
Nine businesses are to be relocated in conjunction with this bridge
replacement project. There will also be one residential relocatee on St.
Dunstans Road. A Relocation Report is included in this report as
Attachment 1.
It is the policy of NCDOT to ensure that comparable replacement
housing will be available prior to construction of state and
federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of
Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the
inconvenience of relocation:
* Relocation Assistance
* Relocation Moving Payments
* Relocation Replacement Housing Payments of Rent Supplement
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will
be available to assist displacees.with information such as availability
and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and
financing or other housing programs. The Relocation Moving Payments
Program, in general, provides for payment of actual moving expenses
encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or
tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable
financing arrangement (in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement
Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500
to owners who are eligible and qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are
eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in
accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1910 (Public Law 91-646), and the
North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-18). The
program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in
relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At
least one relocation officer is assigned to each highway project for this
purpose.
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced
families, individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm
operations for relocation assistance advisory services without regard to
race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will schedule
its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations and
possession of replacement housing which meets decent, safe, and sanitary
standards. The displacees are given at least a 90-day written notice
after NCDOT purchases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will
be offered in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public
utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement
property will be within the financial means of the families and
individuals displaced and will be reasonably accessible to their displaced
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for
and moving to replacement property.
10
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will
receive an explanation regarding all available options, such as (1)
purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement housing, either
private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-occupant housing to
another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning state or federal programs offering assistance to
displaced persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in
order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new
location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the
displacee for the costs of moving personal property from homes,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations acquired for a
highway project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners, NCDOT will
participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for replacement
closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for any increased
interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement to
owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased payments, and
incidental purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined total),
except under the Last Resort Housing provision.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to
exceed $5,250, to rent a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment,
including incidental expenses, on the purchase of a replacement dwelling.
The down payment is based upon what the state determines is required when
the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the
NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects unless and until
comparable replacement housing has been offered or provided for each
displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement. No
relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining
eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or
any other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement
housing is not available, or when it is unavailable.within the displacee's
financial means, and the replacement payment exceeds the federal/state
legal limitation. The purpose of the program is to allow decent, safe,
and sanitary replacement housing to be provided. It is not felt that this
program will be necessary on the project since there appear to be adequate
opportunities for relocation in the area.
No effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project
is not expected to affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in
the area.
Buncombe County is in the Mountain physiographic province of North
Carolina and is characterized by steep slopes and sharply incised streams.
The Swannanoa River traverses the study area and slows towards the west,
eventually draining into the French Broad River, part of the French Broad
River Basin.
11

Three upland community types
studies: riparian fringe, disturbed
remainder of upland land within the
commercial use.
were identified during the field
field, and hardwood pine forest. The
project area has been converted to
The land adjacent to the Swannanoa River within the project area has
been heavily commercialized; however, a small riparian fringe still
exists. This community is dominated by such species as river birch
(Betula ni ra), box elder (Acer nnegun?do), black willow (Salix nigra),
stinging nettle (Urtica dioica abl ckberry (Rubus sp.), Virginia creeper
(Parthenocissus guinquefo is , buttercup (RanuncuTus sp.), and grape vine
(its sp.)
Land use within the project area on the west side of the Swannanoa
River is dominated by the Southern Railway and a large junkyard.
Disturbed field communities are found interspersed with these commercial
developments. Dominant species found here include blackberry (Rubus sp.),
tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), catalpa (Catalpa s ep ciosa poison
ivy (Toxicodendroicans cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium var.
lam bratum wooly mu ein Verbascum thapsus go So ago
dock Rumex sp.), nightshade o anum sp. yellow sweet clover Melclot
otus
officianalis), thoroughwort Eu atorium sp.), spiderwort (Tradescacia
su as era , Virginia creeper Part enocissus uin uefolia), grape vine
Vitis sp.), matelea (Matelea sp. , plantain (P antago sp.), and numerous
poaceous species.
On the northern terminus of the project, the proposed alignment
crosses a hardwood-pine forest growing on steep slopes. The canopy of
this forest is dominated by sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), red maple
(Acer rubrum), black locust (Robinia pseucacia , an white pine (Pinus
stro6ujF_
Other common species present include black cherry (Prunus serotina),
blackberry (Rubus sp.), wild rose (Rosa sp.), poison ivy Toxico endron
radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lon ci era 'a onica), and woo sorre
(Oxalis sp.). On the forest edges,, weecy--species such as tree of heaven
(Ai'Ta-nthus altissima) and kudzu (Pueraria lobata) are dominant.
Potential impacts to upland plant communities are calculated based
upon an average construction width of 60 feet with variable sections on
the northern terminus due to steep slopes. This "impact footprint" will
result in the direct removal of vegetative cover within that zone.
Vegetative communities that are under the bridge spans will have the
opportunity to re-vegetate after construction; however, the regeneration
will be hampered by insufficient solar incidence and water. While it is
likely that some plants will grow under these conditions, the new
communities will not be the same as those removed during construction.
Preliminary impacts to upland plant communities are as follows:
12
COMMUNITY IMPACT
Riparian Fringel 0.1 acre
Disturbed Field 1 0.4 acre
Hardwood-Pine Forest2 0.3 acre
Hardwood-Pine Forest 0.9 acre
2 Community will be spanned by bridge.
Community will be permanently eliminated by roadway.
No vegetated wetland communities occur within the impact zone of the
subject project.
The various community types found within the study area have limited
potential to support large vertebrates due to the urbanized location and
large areas of commercialized land that surround the project area. Common
mammals that may be found within the study area include gray squirrel
(Sciurus caroliniensis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), Virginia opossum
(Di e p is virginiana , and numerous species small rodents.
Bird species that were identified during the field investigation
include blue jay (C anocitta crestata), common crow (Crovus
Brach rh nchos), mockingbird Mimus poly?lottos), cardinal Car inalis
car ina is , and American rein Turdus migratorius).
Reptiles and amphibians are difficult to identify in the field
because they are small, quick, and avoid capture. Common reptiles and
amphibians that may be found within the study area include numerous
species of lizards, snakes, salamanders, frogs, turtles, and toads.
No attempt to identify fish species was made during the field
studies; however, the Swannanoa River is known to support good fishing for
catfish (Ictalurus sp.), numerous species of sunfish (Le orris sp. and
Centrarchus sp. , and smallmouth bass (Micropterous dolomieui .
Direct impacts to vertebrate fauna will result from the removal of
habitat associated with project construction. Organisms utilizing this
habitat will be displaced into new areas, increasing the likelihood of
inter- and intraspecific competition for resources. Fossorial organisms
are likely to be eliminated due to earth moving activities. Habitat
reduction is an unavoidable consequence of constructing a roadway on new
alignment. While this project will not bisect a large undeveloped tract
of land, the effects of previous fragmentation will be magnified by
shifting the alignment approximately 60 feet to the east. Possible
implications of habitat elimination due to highway widening include
changes in dispersal patterns of both land and animal species, creation of
"edge" ecotones which provide new habitat for pioneer species, and
increased mortality rates to mobile species due to vehicular kills.
13
The greatest impact may occur to aquatic species that may suffer from
increased loads of sediments during construction and/or new pollutants
from roadway runoff. Sedimentation of a waterway can have serious impacts
to many organisms. Suspended sediments reduce the amount of light
available to photosynthetic organisms, which are the base of the food
chain. Sediments may also clog the gills of fish organisms. Sessile
organisms will be the most heavily impacted of the aquatic species.
Soils are an important feature in any area as their makeup often
dictates what types of vegetation may occur there. No soil series listed
by the US Soil Conservation Service as being totally hydric will be
crossed by the project. The majority of the project area has been
classified as urban soils, representing the extensive disturbance that has
occurred over time in this area. A small strip on the east bank of the
Swannanoa River is mapped as being Rosman soils, which is listed by the US
Soil Conservation Service as frequently supporting hydric inclusions;
however, upon field observation, no hydric soils are present within the
project area. The steep slopes to be impacted on the western terminus of
the project are made up of Fannin Series soils, which are generally
well-drained residuum of weathered mica, gneiss, and schist.
The study area falls within the confines of the French Broad River
Basin. The proposed project crosses the Swannanoa River approximately one
mile upstream from its confluence with the French Broad River.
These waters are classified as class C by the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. This
classification reflects "best usage" of these waters and is defined as
suitable for "aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture." Water quality standards
applicable to this classification are set forth in 15 NCAC 2B.0200,
Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters
of North Carolina.
Potential impacts to water resources include the following:
- Increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion.
- Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff and/or
toxic spills.
Alterations of water level due to interruptions of additions to
surficial and/or groundwater flow.
Strict adherence to Best Management Practices will be advocated
during the design and construction phases of this project in order to
minimize impacts to water resources.
No waters classified as Designated Public Mountain Trout Water, High
Quality Waters, Outstanding Resource Waters, nor any segments of rivers
classified under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act or the state
Natural and Scenic Rivers Act, will be impacted by the proposed project.
14
A letter of comment has been obtained from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) for the proposed project (see
Attachment 2). The NCWRC has no objection to the project as proposed. It
is noted that the NCWRC is especially pleased that no new piers will be
placed in the Swannanoa River and that the existing pier will be removed
to the bottom of the riverbed.
As of January 27, 1994, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
lists eight federally-protected species for Buncombe County.
Federally-Protected Species
for Buncombe County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS HABITAT
Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian elktoe PE* NO
Fe is con-color couguar
- Eastern cougar E* NO
?GTa
ucom ss sa rinus Carolina northern
coloratus flying squirrel E NO
Geum ra iatum Spreading avens E NO
G_ymno erma ineare
- Rock gnome lichen PE NO
Sa itaria fascicu
Tata Bunched arrowhead E* NO
arracenia ru ra Mountain sweet
var. onesii pitcher-plant E* NO
S iraea virginiana Virginia spiraea T* YES
"E" - denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
"T" - denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range).
"PE" - denotes Proposed Endangered (a species that is proposed to be
listed as endangered and which is protected under law while its
status is under review).
- No specimen from Buncombe County found in the past twenty years
(1973-1993).
The only federally protected species for which habitat exists at the
project site is Virginia spiraea. A plant by plant survey was conducted
in the impact zone of the proposed project; no populations of the species
were observed. Therefore, it is anticipated no impact to this species will
occur from project construction.
The following table shows Federal Candidate and State listed species
for Buncombe County. Federal Candidate species are not legally protected
under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
15
listed as Threatened or Endangered. Candidate species are defined as
organisms who are vulnerable to extinction although data are not
sufficient to warrant a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered or Proposed Threatened at this time. Organisms which are
listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the
North Carolina Heritage Program's list of Rare Plant and Animal Species
are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and
the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Federal Candidate/State Protected Species
for Buncombe County
SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON NAME
STATE
STATUS HABITAT
Myotis subulatus Eastern small-footed SC N
Ieibir bat
Sorex paTustris Southern water shrew SC Y
unct
Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler - N
emm s muhlenber ii Bog turtle T N
ry?pto rant us Hellbender SC Y
a eganjensis
Percina macroce hala Longhead darter Sc Y
am arus re urrus French Broad stream - Y
crayfish
Phyciodes batesi Tawny crescent - N
butterfly
Speyeria diana Diana fritillary - N
butterfly
Buc?kleya distichophYlla Piratebrush E N
Calama rostis cainii Cain's reedgrass E N
Eup or is ur urea Wolf's milk spurge - N
Hex
asty is contracts Mountain heartleaf E N
?
Hex?ast lli s trench broad - N
rhomiformis heartleaf
Jug ans cinera Butternut - Y
Juncus tri i us One flowered rush N
caro inT nia
Lilium gray Gray's lily T-SC N
Lysimachia fraseri Fraser's loosestrife E Y
Monotro sis o orata Sweet pinesap - N
Ru eccia triiloba Pinnate-lobed - N
var. pinnati oba black-eyed Susan
Sax?ifrag?a carte ana Gray's saxifrage - N
Silene ovata Mountain catchfly - N
NOTE: "*" Population documented as extant in Buncombe County in the
past ten years
"-" Species not afforded state protection but listed as Federal
Candidate.
16
The placement of fill material into "Waters of the United States", as
defined at 33 CFR 328.3, falls under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps
of Engineers. The Swannanoa River, from bank-to-bank, is classified as
"Waters of the United States," and as such, falls under this purview.
In accordance with section 404 of the Clean Water Act, permit
authorization will be required from the US Army Corps of Engineers (Cores)
for the discharge of fill material into "Waters of the United States.'
Directly related to the Corps permit is the 401 Water Quality Certifi-
cation administered by the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Management. This certification must be granted before the Corps approves
action. Since the replacement of Bridge No. 76 has been classified as a
federal categorical exclusion, it is anticipated that this action will be
authorized under Nationwide Permit 23 (33 CFR 330.5(a)(23); however, the
Corps reserves final discretionary authority in these matters.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The
investigation will include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site
testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory testing. This may
require test borings in streams and/or wetlands. These activities will
require authorization under Nationwide Permit No. 6.
In order for Nationwide Permits to apply, conditions outlined in 33
CFR 330.5(b) and management practices outlined in 33 CFR 330.6, must be
followed. When the above provisions cannot be met, impacts to wetlands
will be considered on an individual permit basis.
Generally, for wetland losses covered under Nationwide Permits, no
compensatory mitigation is required. However, the Corps reserves final
discretionary authority in these matters. When mitigation is required,
NCDOT will develop a suitable mitigation plan in accordance with the
policy outlined in the 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the Corps and
the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Buncombe County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Program, and this crossing is located in a designated flood plain zone.
The project is not anticipated to significantly alter the existing surface
drainage patterns in the project area and will not require significant
amounts of fill in the floodplain. The approximate limits of the 100-year
floodplain are shown in Figure 4. The proposed project is consistent with
the intent and requirement of zoning regulations.
This project must be reviewed under Section 26a of the Tennessee
Valley Authority (TVA) Act. The final bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of
the effects of the replacement structure on the 100-year flood elevation,
and notice of compliance with the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 will
be forwarded to TVA for approval under Section 26a.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels and air quality will be
insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will
be temporary.
17
The project is located within the Western Mountain Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Buncombe County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Because the project is located in an "attainment" area, the
provisions of the November 24, 1993 transportation regulation (40 CFR
Parts 51 and 93) are not currently applicable. This project is not
anticipated to create any adverse effect on air quality of this attainment
area.
It is noted the impact on air quality will be insignificant. If
vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the 2D.0520.
A site inspection by NCDOT Geotechnical Unit personnel of the
property located at 512 McDowell Street (previously a gas station)
indicates there is no reason to suspect soil contamination. While the
existing property, which now houses a print shop and a baseball card shop,
has pump islands and a canopy, there is no evidence that underground
storage tanks for petroleum (USTs) exist on the property. The
Geotechnical Unit determined that the area south of the building, which is
now grown over with grass and weeds, was the former location of
underground storage tanks and that they have been removed. This was
confirmed during a telephone conversation with the current owner of the
property. The junkyard beneath the existing bridge has also been
investigated for hazardous materials. It was concluded that the no
hazardous materials contamination is located in the junkyard in the
proposed area of construction.
There are numerous properties in the vicinity of the project that are
eligible for inclusion or listed in the National Register of Historic
Places. The existing bridge, also known as the McDowell Street Viaduct,
is historically significant. In addition, the project involves the
acquisition of land and one contributing element within the St. Dunstans
Historic District, which is eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places. The project is immediately adjacent to the
Biltmore Estate, which is a National Historic Landmark. Asheville High
School, which is located adjacent to the roadway on the north approach, is
considered to be individually eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places. The locations of these historic properties are shown in
Figure 5.
This project has been coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Office, who concurs that the project will have an adverse
effect on the St. Dunstans Historic District and the McDowell Street
Viaduct. The project will have no adverse effect on Asheville High
School. Properties that will be affected by the proposed project are
shown in Figure 6. It has also been determined that the project, as
proposed, will have no effect on the other historic properties located
within the Area of Potential Effect: the Southern Railway Freight Depot,
Biltmore Hardware, Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark, and 32 All
Souls Crescent.
18
The southern approach to the replacement bridge is located within the
Biltmore Village Locally Designated Historic District, which is shown in
Figure 7. Historic resources, which are located within the Area of
Potential Effect for this project and within the locally designated
historic district, are 32 All Souls Crescent, the Biltmore Hardware store,
and a portion of the McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76). The project
will have no effect on 32 All Souls Crescent and the Biltmore Hardware
properties. However, the project will have an adverse effect on the
bridge since it will be removed. A Certificate of Appropriateness must be
obtained from the Historic Resources Commission of Asheville and Buncombe
County for the final design of the project.
The recommended alternate has been determined, through coordination
with the State Historic Preservation Officer, to have an adverse impact on
the McDowell Street Viaduct and the St. Dunstans Historic District.
Impacts to these historic resources have been addressed, and mutually
agreeable mitigation measures have been adopted by the State Historic
Preservation Officer, the Federal Highway Administration, the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, and the City of Asheville, to
lessen the effects of project construction. Further descriptions of the
historic resources located within the Area of Potential Effect (APE),
discussion on how the project will affect the historic resources, and
mitigation measures are included in the Section 4(f) evaluation, which is
attached to this categorical exclusion.
An archaeological investigation was conducted for this bridge
replacement project. Data obtained from corings at the project site
indicate that the areas which are likely to be disturbed by bridge
construction are unlikely to contain significant archaeological resources.
An archaeological study for this project has been completed and
transmitted to the SHPO for their review and comment. Informal
coordination with the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology and the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicates no further
archaeological investigations are needed.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or
their representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and
construction projects on prime and important farmland soils, as designated
by the US Soil Conservation Service. Land which has been converted to
non-agricultural uses, through development or the planning and regulatory
activities of the local jurisdiction, is exempt from consideration under
the Act. The project is best described as urbanized. Existing land uses
in the area include multi-family and low density residential,
institutional, and commercial development. No agricultural activities
occur within the project vicinity. Therefore, further consideration under
the Farmland Protection Policy Act is not required.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
environmental effects will result from implementation of the project.
19
IV. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
The Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for this project was approved by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation on May 31, 1994 and by the
Federal Highway Administration on June 1, 1994. The following federal,
state, and local agencies and officials were provided copies of the
above-mentioned document and asked for their comments on the proposed
project.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Appalachian Regional Commission
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development
U. S. Department of the Interior
- Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance
- National Park Service
Tennessee Valley Authority
State Clearinghouse
City of Asheville
Historic Resources Commission of Asheville and Buncombe County
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
Asterisks (*) indicate agencies from which written responses were
received. The only agency to respond was the N. C. Department of Cultural
Resources, who commented that the document adequately addresses their
concerns regarding historic resources.
V. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearing
A public hearing for this project was held on August 10, 1994 at
Asheville High School in Asheville. Approximately 15 citizens and 7 NCDOT
personnel attended the hearing. The format of the hearing was informal.
The following substantial comments were received in conjunction with
the hearing:
Comment: "...It is requested that the fifth leg of the existing
intersection at McDowell Street and Lodge Street remain."
Response: Due to the geometric configurations and proposed location
of the new bridge (east of the existing bridge), the fifth leg at the
McDowell Street/Lodge Street intersection will be eliminated. The
revised intersection will be shifted eastward, and turn lanes will be
added to accommodate the high number of turning movements at the
intersection. Several other factors, which make the provisions of
the fifth leg infeasible, include: the necessity to install guardrail
or extend the bridge rail beyond the end of the bridge to protect the
end of the bridge; difficulty in providing adequate signal phasing to
handle the high volumes of traffic which travel through this
intersection; the differences in elevation between the existing
parking lots of businesses which feed into the fifth leg of the
20
intersection and the grade of the proposed roadway; and the inability
to provide an adequate turning radius from the fifth leg of the
intersection onto McDowell Street (northbound) due to its proximity
to the proposed structure.
Comment: "To make the bridge look good, the [proposed "Texas-type"]
guar rail should be extended on both sides of McDowell Street [from
the end of the bridge] up to the Lodge Street intersection" in place
of the proposed metal guard rail.
Response: Replacing the proposed metal guardrail with the
Texas-type" guardrail would increase the rail cost by approximately
$93.00 per linear foot for a distance of approximately 300 feet.
This change would also require additional design work. This request
will be considered during further design.
Comment: "...We strongly feel that the handrail pickets should be
parallel to the light posts."
Response: The opening in the proposed bridge rails will be
perpendicular to the bridge deck, and the top of the bridge rail will
be parallel to the bridge deck. This allows the contractor to build
a whole section at one time. The light post will be perpendicular to
the ground, which is in keeping with the existing bridge design.
Comment: "We are in favor of [having] the proposed Evanston style
light fixtures upgraded to the same type of historic light fixture
currently being developed by Biltmore Village."
Response: A provision in the Memorandum of Agreement allows the City
of Asheville to upgrade the proposed light fixtures. The suggested
custom Biltmore Village style light fixture is a possibility if the
City of Asheville covers its additional cost over the less expensive,
currently proposed Evanston style fixture. The custom Biltmore
Village style type would have to adhere to current roadway
illumination standards.
Comment: "...We feel that the
architectural (less engineered)
existing arched supports..."
new bridge should have a more
look from below, similar to the
Response: The steel beams, which make up the underside of the
proposed bridge, allow for longer spans. Longer spans reduce the
number of bents required, which, in turn, substantially decrease the
cost of the project. It is not the intent of the Federal Highway
Administration nor the North Carolina Department of Transportation to
replicate the new bridge after the existing bridge.
Comment: "...We request that the new signalling equipment ... be
re ocated to a less noticeable intersection, or perhaps tucked under
the south end of the bridge.
21
Response: The proposed traffic signals will be incorporated into a
computer system, thus probably decreasing the size of the equipment
used to operate the signals. If feasible, the equipment will be
placed in a less conspicuous quadrant of the intersection or set back
from its existing location to allow for future construction of
historic district signage.
Comment: We would like to see the bronze plaque from the existing
ri ge reinstalled on the new bridge... alongside a new plaque which
describes this wonderful process we have gone through to achieve this
lasting contribution to our community."
Response: Any action concerning a new or existing bronze plate needs
to be approved by the Board of Transportation. This request will be
forwarded to the Division 14 Board of Transportation Member for his
review and/or consideration by the Board of Transportation.
Comment: It is requested that granite curb be substituted for any
proposed, traditionally used, concrete curb and gutter in the
district.
Response: If the City of Asheville wants to use granite curb in the
isd? trict rather than traditionally used concrete curb and gutter, the
granite curb, including curved radius curb, must be both requested
and supplied by the City.
Comment: It is requested that St. Dunstans Road be constructed into
a cul-de-sac and the construction of the full intersection of St.
Dunstans Road, Short McDowell Street, and McDowell Street be
eliminated from the proposed project.
Response: If this request is presented to the Asheville City Council
yb the citizens from St. Dunstans Road and if the request is
approved, the NCDOT will consider cul-de-sacing St. Dunstans Road.
VI. FINAL SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION
1. Proposed Action
The proposed project consists of replacing Bridge No. 76 on US 25
over Southern Railway and the Swannanoa River. The purpose of the project
is to replace a bridge which has deteriorated to the point such that
rehabilitation is not considered feasible. Since US 25 is a major route
in the City of Asheville, closure of this road at Bridge No. 76 is not
considered prudent.
The location and a description of the project are included in
Section IV. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS.
22
2. Section 4(f) Properties
At the beginning of Civil War, Asheville had a population of just
over one thousand residents. Despite its relative isolation and although
the construction of the Buncombe Turnpike ca. 1830 had a tremendous effect
on the accessibility of the village and the surrounding countryside,
Asheville was prospering as the major commercial center for the mountains
of North Carolina. In addition, almost from the time of its settlement,
the cool climate and clear mountain air acted as a drawing card for
wealthy families seeking to escape the oppressive heat and attendant
illnesses of the lowland South. "Consumptives," as virtually all
sufferers of respiratory and undefined debilitating diseases were labeled,
sought the bracing mountain air as a highly-touted cure-all.
Indirect effects of the War (the area experienced only a few minor
skirmishes) devastated the little town. Like much of the South, the
region's predominantly agricultural economy suffered from lack of man and
animal power, seed, implements, and livestock. The total worthlessness of
Confederate currency and the shortage of work of any sort that paid in
hard cash made it difficult for even the most enterprising and
hard-working citizens to provide the barest of necessities for themselves
and their families.
Prior to the war, the majority of farmers in Buncombe County
practiced subsistence farming which, supplemented with the abundant fish
and game in the wooded mountainous terrain, supplied most of the food and
clothing for farm families. Small grains, primarily corn and wheat, were
grown for personal use as well as a cash crop. Local raising of livestock
and Asheville's status as a supply station for drovers from Tennessee and
Kentucky on their way to Georgia and South Carolina, made fodder crops
tantamount to small-scale cotton production in the lower regions of the
South.
After the War, Asheville and Buncombe County, like the rest of the
state, found that subsistence farming would no longer support farm
families. As merchants moved toward a cash-based economy and away from
the barter system which had been an integral part of pre-war commerce,
farmers were faced with the necessity of producing an in-demand cash crop.
Although economic and social recovery was slow between 1870 and 1880, it
was steady. The Asheville Citizen newspaper was a leader in preaching
progressive farming metes, 'agricultural diversification, manufacturing,
and securing a railway line as the answers to post-war recovery.
An experiment with tobacco cultivation in 1868 by Colonel Stephen Lee
and the amazing engineering feat that brought the railroad into Asheville
in 1880 pushed Asheville into new prosperity. Colonel Lee's tobacco
proved to be of excellent quality, and despite the labor intensiveness of
the crop, relatively small amounts of acreage yielded high cash returns as
opposed to other crops such as cotton, which required high acreage as well
as a major labor force. Particularly after the arrival of the long-awaited
railroad in 1880, raw tobacco, in addition to "finished" tobacco products,
pumped desperately needed cash in to the Asheville and Buncombe County
economy. The arrival of the "Iron-Horse" meant more than we today, with
air travel and super highways, can ever imagine. Railroad service was the
symbol of New South progressivism and the perceived savior of the war-torn
23
South. Particularly in the mountainous areas, where not only the
ubiquitous lack of navigable rivers but also the extreme difficulty of
constructing roads to traverse the daunting terrain made travel difficult,
the arrival of the railroad provided a major link with the rest of the
region and, therefore, the country.
Asheville and Buncombe County's love affair with tobacco production
and manufacturing was as short as it was sweet. Barely two decades after
the introduction of tobacco cultivation, the bottom fell out of the
market. Tobacco was notorious for depleting the soil without massive
fertilization and, despite the transportation possibilities that came with
the railroad, importation of the mountain crop could not compete with the
massive production and manufacturing activities of the new "Tobacco Belt"
in the eastern Piedmont and western Coastal Plain counties. Although the
end of the "tobacco epidemic" dealt a severe blow to the region's fragile
economy, Asheville and its environs had once again begun to capitalize on
its natural resources. Tobacco gave the economy a desperately needed cash
infusion, but perhaps more importantly, along with the railroad, it
renewed interest in the area as a tourist and health resort and piqued the
interest of the financiers, philanthropists, and developers who saw
enormous potential exploiting the natural beauty and "health" climate of
the mountain town.
Once Asheville had rail service, it experienced a dizzying influx of
new permanent residents, as well as summer and winter tourists. From a
population of 2,690 in 1880, the number of residents swelled to 10,235 by
1890. A progressive and optimistic city government began a series of
civic improvements coinciding with the arrival of the railroad. A gas
company, streetcar system, sewer system, waterworks, electrical plant,
improved educational system, and a Board of Trade to promote the virtues
of Asheville were all in place by 1890. Also during this amazing decade
of growth came the large luxury hotels, including the Swannanoa Hotel, the
Grand Central, and the original Battery Park Hotel, catering to the
wealthy tourists.
Perhaps the single most important visitor to Asheville was a guest at
the Battery Park Hotel in 1887, George W. Vanderbilt. Vanderbilt
literally came, saw, and conquered. By 1890 he had purchased 125,000 acres
of land near south Asheville, "as far as his eye could see." He also
began construction on Biltmore House, the literal palace from which he
could survey his mountainous fiefdom. Vanderbilt's influence on Asheville
can hardly be underestimated. His generosity toward his adopted home
virtually knew no bounds. Biltmore Village, solely built and owned by
Vanderbilt for the residential and commercial needs of his dozens of
imported craftsmen, still stands virtually intact as a testament to his
baronial lifestyle and patriarchal attitudes. The superb architects,
craftsmen, landscapers, and foresters Vanderbilt brought to Asheville to
realize his dream estate had a lasting effect on much of the built
environment which characterizes Asheville today. His Biltmore Village, in
contrast to the chateauesque style Biltmore House, was modeled on
English-style architecture reinforcing its function as the manorial
village. The pebbledash and half-timbered frame buildings with their
gambrel or complex rooflines and Tudor Revival decorative elements brought
a new architectural language in terms of materials and styles to
24
Asheville. The architects and craftsmen who worked with the principal
designers of the Biltmore Estate and Village continued to work in these
modes well into the boom period of the twenties. Other less calculated
styles found their way into Biltmore Village as well. Usually constructed
after the Vanderbilt period (ca. 1910), these buildings exhibited the
standard commercial styles of the era. Biltmore Hardware Store, for
instance, is an excellent, virtually unchanged example of ca. 1920
commercial architecture. The building facade is intact with its paired,
recessed double-door entrances and display windows. The interior is
intact as well, including original store fixtures, mezzanine office space,
decorative pressed-metal ceiling, and upper floor with rental rooms.
Doug Swaim, in Cabins and Castles, suggests that not only did the
Vanderbilt era buildings popuTarize t Fe Tudor Revival style, materials,
and decorative details, but in a broader sense encouraged the widespread
use of historic styles and detailing with symbolic associations. The St.
Dunstans Historic District exhibits this trend in many of the residences.
Tucked in a heavily-wooded, undulating area between the up-scale
developments in Kenilworth and Victoria, the St. Dunstans Historic
District contains a wide variety of building styles and materials.
Bungalows, Tudor Revival cottages, interpretations of Mission Revival, and
variations of the Colonial Revival style stand cheek-to-jowl in brick,
stone, wood, stucco, and shingle materials.
The world-wide press coverage received by the 1895 Christmas party
which officially signaled the completion of Biltmore House sparked even
more interest in the Asheville area. A frenzy of civic and private
development characterized Asheville until the Crash of 1930. Minor
setbacks, including a major flood in 1916 and the inconveniences of World
War I, barely made a dent in the real-estate-development-get-rich-quick
mania of the early decades of the twentieth century. The post-war Jazz
Age, endless prosperity attitude that swept the rest of the country was
eagerly embraced by Asheville--the Land O'Sky where nothing could go
wrong.
There were signs that the economy's foundation was beginning to
crack; however, the eternal optimism of civic leaders and private
developers overshadowed these premonitions. Unlimited, mostly unsecured,
credit created personal fortunes on paper and funded civic improvements
while the city's indebtedness spiraled out of control. Nevertheless, these
warnings were not taken seriously and the city continued its ambitious
program of infrastructure improvements and governmental and cultural
construction projects. Douglas Ellington's fanciful, almost shocking,
1926 Art Deco City Hall set the tone for future projects that would make
Asheville known as the "Art Deco City." The former Lee Edwards High
School constructed by Ellington in 1929, now the Asheville High School,
pushed Ellington's sophisticated style out of downtown and into the
suburbs. The high school was also part of the "Program of "Progress," as
the overall city plan was dubbed. Along with a new grammar school, the
high school was not only an architectural gem, but a symbol of the city's
commitment to progress in all areas within its jurisdiction. A central
tower with tile cap forms the centerpiece for three radiating classroom
25
wings. The school has been very sensitively expanded throughout the years
with the facade still intact and dominating McDowell Street from its site
above a landscaped and terraced lawn. A plan for the City of Asheville
produced in 1925 by John Nolen, renowned city planner, recommends a number
of the projects eventually undertaken by the city. For instance, the plan
discusses the relocation of the railroad facilities to the broad river
valley west of Biltmore Avenue where the present 1927 Freight Depot and
various warehouses are located. Similarly, private developers continued
to develop residential subdivisions, as well as high-class hotels with
luxurious amenities.
The McDowell Street Viaduct (1928) was a product of this period.
Hailed as "a monument to the vision and progressiveness of the city and
county," the structure was compared in importance to the new
administrative buildings, the Beaucatcher Tunnel, and the new civic
center. Newspaper articles chronicling the completion of the viaduct
reinforced the continued optimism of city fathers as they announced
additional major projects.
The construction of the new (1927) Southern Railway Freight Depot in
the Swannanoa River Valley almost directly below the viaduct was also part
of the City's plans to utilize this relatively small area of level land as
an industrial center. The Depot is surrounded by a number of warehouses
along Meadow, Short and McDowell Streets, some of which were undoubtedly
associated with industries that utilized the railway to ship finished
goods and receive raw materials. The Depot itself is a virtually intact,
fine example of well-detailed utilitarian architecture. The two-story,
brick building features an office section at the east end with simple but
well-proportioned Georgian Revival-inspired detailing and with numerous
freight bays defined by brick pilasters.
By the end of the 1920s, it appeared that Asheville was ready to take
her place among the great progressive cities of the region, with careful
planning, attention to the infrastructure, governmental, recreational,
cultural, and institutional facilities, private development moving
apace--and then the bottom fell out. Asheville was immediately devastated
by the Crash of 1930. With an economy based on so much unsecured credit,
paper fortunes, and a city deeply in debt for its "Program of Progress,"
the city was virtually paralyzed. Banks failed, the government itself
went into bankruptcy, and in the Land O'Sky, everything went wrong.
The legacy of the half a century of unparalleled growth and
prosperity Asheville experienced from the coming of the railroad to the
Crash remains amazingly intact in its built environment. However, that
legacy is in constant danger today as a new period of growth is being
experienced by the city. In contrast to the carefully planned,
high-quality growth of the earlier period, commercial strip development,
urban renewal, and massive road building projects have changed much of
that legacy. For much of its history, Asheville was relatively isolated,
even after the coming of the railroad. With the advent of easy automobile
travel, even in the mountainous areas of the state, Asheville has been
pulled into the automobile age and much of the new development is directly
26
auto related. Biltmore Village boasts fast food restaurants, drive-in
banks, service stations and motels where once there were rows of Tudor
Revival cottages and businesses. The McDowell Street Viaduct, once
considered the state of the art in transporting traffic, is scheduled to
be replaced. Although the freight depot is still in use, the passenger
depot is only a memory and undoubtedly freight traffic has dropped
sharply. Perhaps the only properties in the Area of Potential Effect that
have benefitted from the automobile age are the residences in the St.
Dunstans Historic District, as the car has made commutes to jobs and
services a viable alternative. Neighborhoods such as this one are still
endangered as the areas around them fall prey to commercial activity.
In summary, the majority of the historic resources identified in the
survey of the Area of Potential Effect represent in some way the Boom
Period of Asheville and the unusually high quality of design that
characterized the built environment during that time. From the architects
and artisans collected by George Vanderbilt to the standardized plans for
the viaduct and likely the freight depot to the spin-off residential plans
for the houses in the St. Dunstans Historic District, the resources
reflect perhaps the most important period in Asheville's history in terms
of municipal and private development and architectural excellence.
An historic architectural survey was conducted of the area of
potential effect (APE) associated with this bridge replacement project. A
number of properties were determined to be potentially eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places. The location of these properties
are shown in Figure 2.
a. St. Dunstans Historic District
The St. Dunstans Historic District includes portions of St.
Dunstans Road, St. Dunstans Circle, Sterling Avenue, and Roebling
Circle. The boundary includes the greatest concentration of
contributing properties in the area while excluding adjacent
non-contributing properties. The St. Dunstans residential area is
essentially an enclave unto itself defined in large measure by its
geographical setting. Its curving streets are laid out on a heavily
wooded raise of land such that the neighborhood goes virtually
unnoticed by the motorists on McDowell Street. In addition, there
are very few buildings which intrude upon the early twentieth century
residential character of the area. The boundary for the historic
district is shown on Figure 5.
The St. Dunstans Historic District is tucked into a section of
rolling, wooded, elevated property between the elite neighborhoods of
Kenilworth and Victoria. Although many of the houses are
substantial, they are interspersed with cottages and smaller
bungalows indicating an enclave of middle-to upper-middle-class
residences. Some local residents pass along the tradition that
the property was at one time owned by John Roebling, grandson of the
builder of the Brooklyn Bridge. Roebling is believed to be
responsible for the construction of the rock wall and overlook at the
summit of St. Dunstans Circle (see Figure 6A). Perhaps Roebling
27
intended to build there himself. Roebling built the 1917 Haywood
Building and may well be responsible for the development of the
St. Dunstans area. St. Dunstans is the patron saint of ironmongers,
the Roebling family business, and Roebling Circle was apparently
originally intended to be a mirror of St. Dunstans Circle.
An eclectic mixture of styles, as well as house sizes,
characterizes the St. Dunstans Historic District. Smaller residences
tend to cluster at the ends of streets and along the outer edge of
St. Dunstans Circle. The St. Dunstans Historic District is
considered to be potentially eligible for the National Register under
Criterion C. The district comprises a handsome and largely intact
collection of domestic architecture varying in size and style. As a
group, the residences in the district represent most of the types of
homes being constructed for middle- to upper-middle-class residents
in Asheville during the 1920s.
b. Asheville High School
The Asheville High School occupies a large parcel of land on
McDowell Street (see Figure 5). The proposed National Register
boundary includes the original school building and landscaped,
terraced front lawn, the power house located south of the main
building on McDowell Street, various athletic fields, and additions
to the rear of the school. Modern buildings were omitted from the
National Register boundaries. The Asheville High School, constructed
in 1929 as part of the city's "Program of Progress," was originally
known as Lee Edwards High School. Designed by premier Art Deco
architect, Douglas Ellington, the building continues to dominate this
area of McDowell Street with its center tower and radiating classroom
wings. Also part of the original complex is a stone and brick
powerhouse south of the school yard on McDowell Street. A variety of
athletic fields occupy the space between the two buildings.
The Asheville High School (see Figure 6A) is considered to be
potentially eligible for the National Register under Criterion C for
its unusual and sophisticated design by major architect Douglas
Ellington. It is also considered potentially eligible under
Criterion A for its
association with education in Asheville and as a major component in
the "Program of Progress." The Asheville High School is currently
on the state study list and is considered worthy of further study and
effort towards a possible listing in the National Register of
Historic Places.
C. McDowell Street Viaduct
The McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76) extends from Lodge
Street and All Souls' Crescent in Biltmore Village, northwest across
the Swannanoa River valley to McDowell Street (see Figure 5 and
Figure 6A). The proposed National Register boundary encompasses only
the viaduct. The McDowell Street Viaduct was constructed in 1927-28
as a link between Biltmore, then an incorporated town, and Asheville.
The viaduct is considered to be potentially eligible for listing on
28
the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and D and
has recently been placed on the North Carolina Study List under these
two criteria. Under Criterion A, the viaduct is significant as a
part of the "Program of Progress" carried out by the City of
Asheville during a period of frenzied growth, real-estate
speculation, and a determination on the part of the city fathers to
ensure that municipal facilities "[kept] pace with all this private
speculation." The viaduct is considered potentially eligible under
Criterion C as a fine example of large-scale reinforced concrete
bridge construction by the State Highway Commission. Individualized
specifications were required to accommodate the 1300-foot long
structure with its 27 spans, changes in elevation, railroad tracks
running between the piers, and design details. While there are other
reinforced concrete bridges from this period extant in the state, the
McDowell Street Viaduct is unusual, if not unique, in this region of
North Carolina.
d. Southern Railway Freight Depot
The Southern Railway Freight Depot is located at 33 Meadow Road,
in the river valley, approximately 30 feet west of and below the
McDowell Street Viaduct (see Figure 5). The proposed National
Register boundary includes the freight depot, attached loading
platforms, and immediately adjacent spur lines. The boundary goes to
Meadow Road, where a decorative metal fence provides security. The
Southern Railway Freight Depot was constructed in 1927, probably from
standardized company plans. The Southern Railway Freight Depot is
considered potentially eligible for the National Register under
Criterion C as a fine example of railroad architecture with simple,
yet well-proportioned, ornamentation (see Figure 6B). The symmetry
of the building and the heavy Georgian Revival detailing produce an
industrial building with a restrained elegance in its design. The
likelihood that the Southern Railway Company used standardized plans
with such attention to detail is an illustration of a period tendency
to embellish, to some degree, even the most utilitarian buildings.
The location of the freight depot in the Swannanoa River Valley
follows recommendations in John Nolen's 1925 plan for the City of
Asheville. Nolen, a renowned planner, believed relocating the
freight depot to the valley would encourage the use of this
relatively small amount of level land for industrial purposes. The
Southern Railway Freight Depot is currently on the state study list
and is considered worthy of further study and effort towards a
possible listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
e. Biltmore Hardware Store
The Biltmore Hardware Store is located at 32 Hendersonville Road
(see Figure 5). The proposed National Register boundary encompasses
the lot on which the store is located. The Biltmore Hardware
building is an extremely intact example of early twentieth century
commercial architecture (see Figure 6B). Tradition holds that this
building was built in 1910. However, Sanborn Insurance Maps indi-
cated that the store was probably constructed about 1920. Biltmore
Hardware is considered potentially eligible for the National Register
under Criterion C. The store is an inordinately intact and well-
detailed example of early-twentieth century commercial architecture.
29
f. Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark
A portion of the Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark is
with the APE. Biltmore Estate was designated as a National Historic
Landmark on October 15, 1966, and automatically entered into the
National Register of Historic Places. The original gatehouse (see
index number "43" on Figure 5) is the only historic building located
within the APE; however, the public entrance to the estate, parking
facilities, and two modern buildings for ticket sales and a gift shop
are also located within the APE. A photograph of the gatehouse is
included in Figure 6B. Within the official boundary of the Biltmore
Estate National Historic Landmark (NHL) is a 70-foot perpetual
easement for highway work held by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation. In light of this situation, as well as certain other
questions raised during this project concerning the historic accuracy
of the landmark boundaries, the Federal Highway Administration has
begun a dialogue with the National Park Service concerning the
boundaries of the Biltmore Estate NHL. For the purposes of the
study, the boundaries set forth in the National Historic Landmark
nomination form are considered the official boundaries.
g. 32 All Souls Crescent
Two buildings, considered as one individually listed property in
the Biltmore Village Multiple Resource Area (32 All Souls's
Crescent), are located within the APE. This property, which is
identified by index number "3" in Figure 5, consists of two "Biltmore
Cottages" relocated from 18 Angle Street and 75 Hendersonville Road
to 32 All Souls Crescent and joined by a hyphen. Although the
Multiple Resource Area nomination dates the cottages ca. 1900 with
later alterations, Sanborn Insurance Maps would tend to give
credence to a construction date between 1917 and 1926. Their size,
massing, and architectural detailing are similar to the large
grouping of cottages remaining in the eastern section of Biltmore
Village is evident in the half-timbering and pebbledash sheathing on
both cottages (see Figure 6B). Consequently, the cottage is eligible
for listing in the National Register of Historic Places since it
represents the broad use of Richard Sharp Smith's design motifs for
Biltmore Village.
3. Impacts to the Section 4(f) Properties
The project will affect three properties: the St. Dunstans Historic
District, the Asheville High School, and the McDowell Street Viaduct.
Photographs of these properties are included in Figure 6. A brief
description of the specific impacts to properties within the Area of
Potential Effect are discussed below.
a. St. Dunstans Historic District
The realignment of McDowell Street in the vicinity of the
Asheville High School and the St. Dunstans Historic District will
result in the taking of a contributing residence and outbuilding from
the historic district. Specifically, this taking involves cutting
30
into the hill at the rear of the parcel of 183 St. Dunstans Road (the
Jeanne Leigh Harrison House), a contributing element in the district,
and removing the residence and outbuilding. This historic property,
which is a one-story, stuccoed bungalow cottage with two stories on
the rear, forms the western boundary of the district on the north
side of St. Dunstans Road, essentially the entrance to the district.
Its scale and massing are characteristic of one of the defining
traits of the St. Dunstans Historic District -- the clustering of
smaller houses at the ends of streets. Demolition of this property
will also mean that the northern side of the western boundary will
consist of three vacant parcels before the next contributing
residence. This action will result in an adverse effect on the St.
Dunstans Historic District as a result of the physical destruction of
this historic property pursuant to 36 CFR 800.9 (b)(1).
The construction of the new bridge adjacent to the southwestern
boundary of the historic district will involve cutting into the
hillside located below St. Dunstans Circle. This cut will not require
taking of land from the historic district; however, some existing
vegetation below the overlook on St. Dunstans Circle will be removed
as part of this action. The adverse effect on the St. Dunstans
Historic District has been addressed in a Memorandum of Agreement
(Attachment 3) with stipulations to protect the stone wall which
borders the district, provide appropriate landscaping to maintain the
district's residential atmosphere, and mitigate the loss of the
house.
b. Asheville High School
This project will involve the acquisition of a permanent
drainage easement from the Asheville High School property near the
power plant. A drainage pipe currently exists in the same location
using a temporary easement. Therefore, the acquisition of the
permanent easement and the improvements to drainage facilities will
have no effect on the qualities which cause the Asheville High School
to be eligible for the National Register.
C. McDowell Street Viaduct
The focal point of this undertaking, the McDowell Street Viaduct
(Bridge No. 76), will be demolished and replaced with a new bridge.
Therefore, there will be an adverse effect on this National Register
eligible property pursuant to 36 CFR 800.9(b)(1). The adverse effect
on the McDowell Street Viaduct has been addressed in a Memorandum of
Agreement to mitigate the loss of this structure.
d. Southern Railway Freight Depot
The Southern Railway Freight Depot is located in the Swannanoa
River valley approximately 30 feet west of and below the McDowell
Street Viaduct, and is surrounded by modern commercial and
31
railroad-related properties. The new bridge will be located to the
east of the existing viaduct. Thus, the location of the new bridge
will offer a less obstructed view of the depot from most vantage
points in the immediate area. Given the placement of the new bridge
and the existing setting surrounding the depot, the undertaking will
have no effect on the Southern Railway Freight Depot since it will
not introduce visual, audible, or atmospheric elements which are
inconsistent with the characteristics that qualify the depot for the
National Register. Therefore, the project will have no effect on the
Southern Railway Freight Depot.
e. Biltmore Hardware Store
The Biltmore Hardware Store is located on Hendersonville
(Biltmore) Road in the Biltmore Village. The current bridge is
approximately 400 feet from the hardware store. Although the new
bridge will be approximately 100 feet closer to the store than the
existing viaduct, there are expected to be no changes in noise,
traffic, or setting given the existing modern development between the
store and the present bridge. The new bridge will not diminish the
qualities for which the store is eligible for the National Register.
Therefore, the undertaking will have no effect on this property.
f. Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark
The portion of the Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark
located within the APE includes the modern entrance, modern ticket
and gift shop facilities, the visitor parking lot, open space, and
one historic building -- the original gatehouse. The current
undertaking will involve a minor realignment of McDowell Street
within a 70-foot perpetual easement purchased by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation from the Biltmore Company in 1970. The
easement was acquired in connection with North Carolina State Highway
Project 9.7130204 which involved widening approximately 300 feet of
the bridge to accommodate a turn lane at the Biltmore Estate
entrance. Given that the improvements will take place within the
perpetual easement, there will not be a taking of property from the
Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark boundaries. In addition,
the original gatehouse is set well back from the street and is
effectively buffered from the undertaking by the modern buildings and
landscaping. Therefore, the improvements associated with the
replacement of the McDowell Street Viaduct will have no effect on the
significant characteristics which qualify the Biltmore Estate as a
National Historic Landmark.
g. 32 All Souls Crescent
Within the Biltmore Multiple Resource Area, the property at 32
All Souls Crescent, which consists of two joined buildings, is
located directly on Hendersonville Road and is within the APE. The
beginning point of the bridge replacement project, however, is 400
feet north of the property. In addition, the area between the
property and proposed bridge contains several modern structures.
32
Given the property's setting and the distance to the proposed bridge,
the undertaking will have no effect on the qualities which merited
its inclusion in the Biltmore Multiple Resource Area.
4. Avoidance Alternatives
a. St. Dunstans Historic District
Relocation of the bridge west of its present location would
result in the avoidance of the St. Dunstans Historic District.
However, such a shift would necessitate the right of way takings
and/or the removal of contributing elements on adjacent Section 4(f)
properties by the reconstruction of approach roadway to the new
structure and removal of the structure itself. Such impacts would
include: demolition of the pump station on the Asheville High School
property; removal of the Southern Railway Freight Depot, which is
located immediately west of the existing bridge; and right of way
acquisition from the Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark.
These potential impacts indicate replacement of the bridge south of
its present location is not prudent and does not avoid Section 4(f)
resources.
Replacement of the bridge at its existing location was studied
in detail. This replacement scenario would require that traffic be
maintained on the existing structure during construction of the new
bridge. (Traffic must be maintained through the project area during
construction due to the high traffic volumes carried by US 25.) This
would have to be accomplished by using a phased construction
technique by reducing the structure to one lane in each direction,
removing half of the old bridge, and constructing the new bridge in
halves. However, during preliminary design, it was determined that
the bridge had deteriorated to such a condition that phase
construction is not possible. Therefore, replacement of the bridge at
its present location is not a feasible alternate without constructing
a temporary structure to maintain traffic during construction. This
is not prudent due to the excessive cost associated with such a
large, temporary bridge.
In order to avoid the taking of the house located at 183 St.
Dunstans Road, which is a contributing element within the historic
district and located directly across from Asheville High School,
consideration was given to construction of a retaining wall along the
back side of this property. Preliminary design indicates the
retaining wall will result in a reduction in the sight distance
around the curve and, therefore, could be a potential safety hazard
for the traveling public. If the wall were constructed, a design
exception would be required since the design speed of about 30 MPH
would be less than the posted speed limit of 35 MPH. Due to the
observed operational speeds of approximately 45 MPH through the
project area, it is anticipated that safety problems would arise if
the wall were constructed. Therefore, the retaining wall is not
considered a prudent method for minimizing impacts to this historic
property.
33
The "do nothing" alternative would avoid use of property within
the St. Dunstans Historic District. However, this alternate would
eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due
to the traffic service provided by US 25.
Rehabilitation of the existing bridge would not impact St.
Dunstans Historic District. Bridge No. 76, however, has deteriorated
to the point at which rehabilitation is not feasible.
b. Asheville High School
With the implementation of a "build" alternative, construction
of the approach roadway to a new bridge will require replacement of
the reinforced concrete pipe, whose outlet end is located in front of
the Asheville High School athletic field. Due to topography
constraints and existing drainage patterns in the project area, it is
not prudent to re-route drainage of the existing pipe to another
location. When the pipe is replaced, the flow conditions of the new
pipe will be similar to those of the existing pipe. However, it is
the policy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation to
acquire a permanent drainage easement at the outlet end of a drainage
structure for maintenance purposes.
The "do nothing" alternative would avoid use of the Asheville
High School property. However, this alternate would eventually
necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the
traffic service provided by US 25.
Rehabilitation of the existing bridge would not impact the
Asheville High School property. Bridge No. 76, however, has
deteriorated to the point at which rehabilitation is not feasible.
C. McDowell Street Viaduct
The purpose of the proposed project is to remove and replace the
McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76). The Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program specifies that deteriorated structures be removed
to qualify for such federal funding. Since the McDowell Street
Viaduct is the focal point of this project, avoidance of this
historic resource is not feasible.
Replacement of the bridge on new location, either to the east or
west of the existing structure, would result in impacts to the
St. Dunstans Historic District or the Asheville High School, Southern
Railway Freight Depot, and the Biltmore Estate National Historic
Landmark. In either case, removal of the McDowell Street Viaduct
(Bridge No. 76) would be necessary if this bridge were replaced, as
per the current policies which govern the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program.
The "do nothing" alternative would avoid use of property within
the St. Dunstans Historic District. However, this alternate would
eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due
to the traffic service provided by US 25.
34
Rehabilitation of the existing bridge would not impact St.
Dunstans Historic District. Bridge No. 76, however, has deteriorated
to the point at which rehabilitation is not feasible.
d. Southern Railway Freight Depot
The recommended alternate avoids this property.
e. Biltmore Hardware Store
The recommended alternate avoids this property.
f. Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark
The recommended alternate avoids this property.
g. 32 All Souls Crescent
The recommended alternate avoids this property.
5. Measures to Minimize Harm
The historic properties, which will be affected by the proposed
project, include the St. Dunstans Historic District and the McDowell
Street Viaduct. The project has been determined to have an adverse effect
on the St. Dunstans Historic District and the McDowell Street Viaduct.
Minimization of harm of only the St. Dunstans Historic District is
possible since the purpose of the project is to remove and replace the
McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76).
A retaining wall along the northeast side of the bridge in the
vicinity of the rock wall along St. Dunstans Circle, will be constructed
to avoid the taking of additional property within the St. Dunstans
Historic District. Without this retaining wall, the rock wall at the top
of the hill and potentially the residence at 46 St. Dunstans Circle (a
contributing element within the district) would be taken. This retaining
wall will be constructed as part of the project, as proposed, to reduce
impacts and minimize harm to the St. Dunstans Historic District.
6. Mitigation Measures
Since the proposed project has been determined to have an adverse
effect on the St. Dunstans Historic District and the McDowell Street
Viaduct (Bridge No. 76), several mitigation measures will be implemented
to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties.
The Federal Highway Administration, the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer, and the City of Asheville have agreed to mitigation
measures in a Memorandum of Agreement, which is included as Attachment 3.
Several features will be incorporated into the design of the project
to help minimize impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed project on
historic properties. See the Memorandum of Agreement in Attachment 3 for
details and drawings on these mitigation measures. These commitments are
as follows:
35
A.
McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76)
1. Prior to demolition, Bridge No. 76 shall be recorded in
accordance with a specified Historic Structure and Landscape
Recordation Plan. A copy of the original construction plans
shall be transmitted to the SHPO.
2. The design of the replacement structure shall consist of a
bridge rail which is similar to the existing rail. This rail
will be similar to the FHWA-approved "Texas-type" rail which
consists of a series of pierced rectangular openings. The rail
will be of sufficient height so that an additional handrail will
not be required atop the bridge rail.
3. Plain concrete outriggers will be provided on the replacement
structure (about 80 feet apart) along both sides of the
structure. NCDOT will provide the conduits so that the lighting
fixtures placed atop the outriggers can be wired.
4. The FHWA and City of Asheville shall work together to provide
appropriate lighting fixtures on the new bridge. The FHWA shall
be responsible for purchasing and installing the lamp posts and
lighting fixtures on the outriggers of the structure. This
installation will include the wiring of the lights to a meter.
The lighting fixtures shall be similar to "Evanston" lighting
fixtures. The City of Asheville shall be responsible for
maintaining the lighting fixtures and securing any metered
service for the lights.
In the event that the City of Asheville requests lighting
fixtures other than the "Evanston" type, the final selection of
the lighting fixtures will be made in consultation with the
State Historic Preservation Officer. Any additional costs which
are incurred by providing another type of lighting fixture will
be paid by the City of Asheville.
B. St. Dunstans Historic District
1. The exterior of the contributing property, the Jeanne Leigh
Harrison House which lies within the St. Dunstans Historic
District, will be recorded in accordance with the Historic
Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan.
2. The rock wall which is adjacent to St. Dunstans Circle will be
protected during construction. The design plans will include the
location of the rock wall, and a prescribed 20-foot buffer zone
will be delineated on the plans to instruct the contractor to
avoid this area.
3. A retaining wall will be constructed immediately northeast of
the replacement structure to minimize impact to the St. Dunstans
Historic District in the vicinity of the rock wall. The final
treatment and/or finish of the new retaining wall will be
developed in consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Office.
36
4. The slope between the buffer zone limits (at the top of the hill
at St. Dunstans Circle) and the top of the retaining wall will
be re-vegetated to maintain the district's residential
character. At a minimum, a landscape plan similar to the one
dated February 11, 1993, which is included in the Memorandum of
Agreement, will be developed in consultation with the SHPO. In
addition to routine maintenance of the landscaped area, the
NCDOT will replace, in kind, any plant materials damaged or lost
within two years of installation. The replacement of damaged or
lost plant materials outside NCDOT right-of-way will be
contingent upon the owner granting NCDOT access to the
landscaped area between NCDOT right-of-way and the buffer zone
near the rock wall.
7. Coordination
The project has been coordinated with the North Carolina Department
of Cultural Resources - State Historic Preservation Office, the City of
Asheville, and the Historic Resources Commission of Asheville and Buncombe
County. Correspondence from the State Historic Preservation Officer is
attached as Attachment 4.
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) has been
notified of the adverse effect on the McDowell Street Viaduct and the
St. Dunstans Historic District and was invited to participate in the
development of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The MOA has been
reviewed and accepted by the ACHP (see Attachment 3).
8. Department of Interior Coordination
A copy of the Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation, along with the Draft
Categorical Exclusion, was provided to the U. S. Department of Interior
(USDOI). USDOI's response to their review of that document is included as
Attachment 5. No objections or significant comments were cited.
9. Comments Received on the Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
The State Historic Preservation Officer commented that the document
adequately addresses the concerns of the N. C. Department of Cultural
Resources regarding historic resources.
10. Conclusion
Based upon the above consideration, there is no feasible and prudent
alternative to the use of the McDowell Street Viaduct and St. Dunstans'
Historic District. The proposed project includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to these historic properties.
JH/wp
/ OD N 7'w M .
N
°? N
04
C4
LU
o,
O ?d c?
a d ?-OW
CL
W
J O? PV r
oo N
a '??• p3 •.?•,:
w
N Z,00;00
McDowell t. `? ;.?,.? ;::?•..
N
FAU
Co.
0000
ap?syl7 e
°S' s'
NI °
O 3 .,
f "?' W ::?
?y
<iRA
•. ?I
¢,k ? 4a
u
,v N
0 RI 07
\ \ 'ARK W
6 b AY
+
+
i
QI ?i
117
? 7, L?.
H

1 a
,LL i e
?' j ? o x o
y l ?
i
M
d

U
e
ende?`I

LLJ
U.j

fu

O

+ ?-

J LU

m I
'L\ N
Q
o a Q
3 U
Zcc
p W
?FqqQq ZA? W?
p
Nv?Z?
x W Qo
?L7GOC7 >Q?
U ZtoN
? o
°zAaaa ma
eiN W
O
.. m f
_ AU 16N i •
••?• to .crT.: i i

1
00
0,
c4 a
LAJ

14

Y
1
6
y
l rv
,
t
u
SS!! - .;

Y 0 z CO

•
m'f.

i 4,,? ?+ rr.
?,r.s
'y

'T1
C
m
rn
W
w
4
O
m
z
0
?o
mx
m _
000
ccn 0
0Z
0c
m cn
rnO
m*
_D
v
?x
m
x
U)
m
n
O
z
-? m
*00
Dx0
o=Z
U) m
MMO
00M
nx
x
* z
Oc
maoN
r x N
r (A
m
O
m
mO
V
Qf
m to
O m
c <
D m
N ?
-40
V) m
5w
m x
m?
?m
x vO
m rn
-4O
00
v
c c?
ER 4
0Z
vz
0c
m cn
4R
m m
mx
w
?M
my
?C)
m
40
z4
O
D
v
W
x
v
m
z
O
-4 M
rn r=
r
m
x
O
x
N
0
x
O
0
r
r
D
0
m
O
in
N
w
x
v
m
z
0

i.
ZONE B
I If ? i
n
Im BARTLETT
\ II
v+ STRc?7
\ it O
N
Z O NEE A 5
(EL 19 86)
DEATH
?ALLEY ZONE C
r ?
R c ZDNE B
17 \v,;°9
i
i
i
I I
LYMAN AVENUE
TOPO ??
2;. ZONE B
1
SOUTHERN
RAILWAY P OQ
BRIDGE NO. 76 j
LL
?,- I3RYSON ST
25
\. RM22
ZONE B-- rQ
Z NEB
FPM 14
r
- ?'
s n \ ? ' 3"
ZONE
A 3
12
S ?(( ~ 1 II I
o. I
100 - YEAR FLOODPLAIN ?aQP 1 ZOg E 1 J,
%• LIMIT OF
\• \',,OETAILED
100-YEAR FLOODPLA I N MAPPING FIGURE 4
B-1070
Lt's
w
cr.
i
0
LL
N
W
4-.
O
N
N ?
-v
c N
:3 a
O O
M L-
s
o
U •?
O O
w
w o
,v o
? v
Z
O
? v
v- +•
J
N ?
Q v
L
a. v
J
O
O
2
U
Cl)
c_7
w
J
J
w
Cl)
Q
w
J
UL)
N?
ZN
NO
U
:) CC
no
H
N
N =
OQ
QZ
Qo
YN
U
O
m
U
Q to
OC
M U
ZE
QO
?N
Z=
oZ
Q
N N
N
O
Q J
O
w Q
N°w 3
a
3> cccc
0 Q
w rb
a
z
O
QY ?
5 O ~
_j
w
¢>U
1--owo
JZQN
w Q Cl) _
J N
Z
Z
J Q Q
H
YrZ
O0No
OG
w N
>m
U.
OU
Zj N
QOca
0 cC
SUN
U) ca
as
f' N ~
Cl)
Z
220
O
OOCN
A I]
a
w
0
LL
m
W
CIC
L LL
H
O
a
W
0
F-
0
W
Ir
U.
Q
3
J_
Q
m
z
cc
W
LIlJ
W
m
0
H
Cl)
W
Ir
Q
0
Q
W
m
0
F-
_J
co
J
Q
o
=ff
a
W Z
W
Ca'3FQ--J
aJ W U
_Z W 0
a o n
off=
_J
In
FQ-
a
W
O
H
0
ru-
m
U.
3
J
Q
Z
m
W
H
F-
Z
W
U
N
W
m
U
N
J
0
N
J
J
Q
N
V)
SWANNANOA RIVER
BRIDGE NO. 76
lS?
LLL
n • ..ee :....: .....
I
4
w
o SO 100
APPROX SCALE IN FEET
..........
INSTn'U7IONAL AREAS
MIXED USE AREAS
COMMERCIAL CORE
COTS? %.j ARE," -,S
Biltmore Village Locally
Designated Historic District FIGURE 7
R E L O C A T I a N
X E.I.S. _ CORRIDOR
PROJECT: 8.1841001
I.D. NO., B-107D
R E R O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
COLNTY: Buncombe - Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
F.A. PROJECT: -
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT LIS 25, Replacement Bridge No. 76 Over Swannanoa River and Southern
Railway
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of Minor-
Displacee Owners Tenants Total ities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 LF
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Families 1 0 1 0 0 0 _ 0 0 1
Businesses 2 7 9 0 VALLE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For S ale For Rent
Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M 0 0-150. D 0-20M 0 5 0-150 0
ANSWER ALL QLESTIONS 20-40M D Y. 150-250 0 20-40M 0 150-250 0
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400 0?? 40-7DM 3 250-400 - 0
X 1. Will special relocation 70-1001 400-600 0 70-100 8 - 400-600 ` 0
services be necessary
?X _ 2. Wi I I schools or churches be i
affected by displacement
X 3. Will business services stiII
be available after pro
ect }---
? 100 LIP 0

?TOTAL 1 -•??
600 UP 0 100 LIP
--
0 __..?
7 600 LIP 0

18 - 0
X ,
4. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size !
type, estimated number of
l
emp
oyees, minorities, etc. See attached sheet.
X S. Will relocation cause a
h
H
i
ous
ng s
ortage
X 6. Source for available hous-
i
(l
ng
ist)
X 7. Will additional housing
b
programs
e needed b
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing h
be considered
X 9. Are there large) disabled;
ld
l
f
e
er
y, etc.
amilies u
- ANSI
JER TH
-I
q -p
X ,
ESE ALSO FOR DES I GN
10. Will public housing be
d
d f
G nee
e
or project
X 11. Is public housing avail-
bl
a
e
X 12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DDS housing available'
d
i
l
ur
ng re
ocation period
X 13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial

means
X 14. Are suitable business sites
- il
bl
(li
ava
a
e
st source)
15. Number months estimated to
compl
TION 8 MOS.
/
_ !!
Z _
-A A46
ReI at o n to Approved` "Date
Form 15. Revised 5/9
ATTACHMENT 1
3. Will not be disrupted due to the project.
4. A. Printwork, printshop and equipment, 1200 SF, 3 employees, no
minorities.
B. Arco Blue Printers, 2400 SF, 10 employees, No minorities.
C. Holloday Paint and Carpet, 4000 SF, 10 employees, no
minorities.
D. Southeastern Architects, Engineer Planners, 600 SF,
4 employees, no minorities.
E. Edward D. Jones and Company, Investments, 600 SF, 3 employees,
no minorities.
F. Eagle Business Systems, office equipment, 600 SF, 2 employees,
no minorities.
G. Altra Auto Rental, 600 SF, 2 employees, no minorities.
H. M. R. Enterprises, Inc., business consulting, 400 SF,
6 employees, no minorities.
1. Community Family Practice, medical center, 3 doctors, 1000 SF
12 employees, no minorities.
6. Beverly-Hanks Realty, Asheville, N. C. and local newspaper
indicated that sufficient busine ss and DSS housing properties
would be available for the above displacees.
8. As necessary in accordance with State law.
11. Housing Authority of the City of Asheville.
12. Beverly-Hanks Realty, Asheville, N. C. and local newspaper
indicated that sufficient busine ss and DSS housing properties
would be available for the above displacees.
14. Beverly-Hanks Realty, Asheville, N. C. and local newspaper
indicated that sufficient busine ss and DSS housing properties
would be available for the above displacees.
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
April 8, 1993
Ms. Julie A. Hunkins, P. E.
N.C. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
SUBJECT: Scoping comments regarding replacement of Bridge #76 on
US 25 over Swannanoa River and Southern Railway,
Buncombe County (TIP #B-1070)
Dear Ms. Hunkins:
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our
scoping comments regarding the replacement of Bridge #76 on US 25
over the Swannanoa River and Southern Railway in Buncombe County.
I have reviewed the information you provided and conducted a site
visit on April 7, 1993.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to replace the existing bridge with another bridge
immediately northeast of the existing structure. The current
design of the new bridge does not include a pier in the river.
Upon completion of the new bridge, the old bridge will be
removed, including the pier presently located in the Swannanoa
River.
The Swannanoa River in this area is not Designated Public
Mountain Trout Water and does not support trout. The river
provides fair habitat for smallmouth bass, sunfish, and various
species of nongame fish at the project site. Due to the close
proximity of the river's confluence with the French Broad River
(approximately 1.5 miles downstream), the project site may also
serve as a spawning area for muskellunge, a gamefish managed by
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC).
The NCWRC has no objection to the project as proposed.
We are especially pleased that no new piers will be placed in the
river and that the existing pier will be removed.
ATTACHMENT 2
I appreciate the opportunity to provide this information in
the early planning stages of this project. Please contact me at
704/652-4257 if you have any questions regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
Stephanie E. Goudreau
Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
cc: Mr. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
ATTACHMENT 3:
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS. the Federal Highway Administration has
determined that replacing Bridge No. 76 (McDowell Street
Viaduct) in Asheville, Buncombe County, North Carolina. will
have an effect upon the McDowell Street Viaduct and the St.
Dunstan's Historic District, properties eligible for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places, and has
consulted with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (Council) pursuant to the regulations
(36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 and Section 110(f)
of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U. S. C. 470f);
and
WHEREAS. the City of Asheville participated in the
consultation and has been invited to concur in this
Memorandum of Agreement,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Federal Highway Administration, the
North Carolina SHPO, and the Council agree that the
undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the
following stipulations in order to take into account the
effect of the undertaking on historic properties.
STIPULATIONS
The Federal Highway Administration will ensure that the
following measures are carried out:
A. McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76)
1. Prior to demolition. Bridge No. 76 shall be recorded
in accordance with the attached Historic St ucture
and Landscape Recordation Plan (Appendix A). A copy
of the original construction plans shall be
transmitted to the SHPO.
?. The design of the replacement structure shall consist
of a bridge rail which is similar to the existing
rail. This rail will be similar to the FHWA-approved
"Texas-type" rail which consists of a series of
pierced rectangular openings (Appendix B). The
height of the rail will be of sufficient height so
that an additional handrail will not be required atop
the bridge rail.
3. Plain concrete outriggers will be provided on the
replacement structure (about 80 feet apart) along
both sides of the structure. NCDOT will provide the
conduits so that the lighting fixtures placed atop
the outriggers can be wired.
4. The FHWA and City of Asheville sha11 work together to
provide appropriate lighting fixtures on the new
bridge. The FHWA shall be responsible for purchasing
and installing the lamp posts and lighting fixtures
on the outriggers of the structure. This
installation will include the wiring of the lights to
a meter. The lighting fixtures shall be similar to
"Evaston" lighting fixtures, shown in Appendix C.
The City of Asheville shall be responsible for
maintaining the lighting fixtures and securing any
metered service for the lights.
In the event that the City of Asheville requests
lighting fixtures other than the "Evaston" type shown
in Appendix C. the final selection of tht lighting
fixtures will be made in consultation with the State
Historic Preservation Officer. Any additional costs
which are incurred by providing another type of
lighting fixture will be paid for by the City of
Asheville.
B. St. Dunstan's Historic District
1. The exterior of the contributing property. the Jeanne
Leigh Harrison House which lies within the St.
Dunstan's Historic District, will be recorded in
accordance with the Historic Structures and Landscape
Recordatign Plan (Appendix A).
?. The rock wall which is adjacent to St. Dunstan's
Circle will be protected during construction. The
design plans will include the location of the rock
wall. and a prescribed 20-foot buffer zone will be
delineated on the plans to instruct the contractor to
avoid this area.
3. r1 retaining wall will be constructed immediately
northeast of the replacement structure to minimize
impact to the St. Dunstan's Historic District in the
vicinity of the rock wall. The final treatment
and/or finish of the new retaining wall will be
developed in consultation with the State Historic
Preservation Office.
4. The slope between the buffer zone limits (at the top
of the hill at St. Dunstan's Circle) and the top of
the retaining wall will be re-vegetated to maintain
the district's residential character. At a minimum,
a landscape plan similar to the one dated February
11, 1993 (Appendix D) will be developed in
consultation with the SHPO. In addition to routine
maintenance of the landscaped area, the NCDOT will
replace, in kind, any plant materials damaged or lost
within two years of installation. The replacement of
damaged or lost plant materials outside NCDOT
right-of-way will be contingent upon the owner
granting NCDOT access to the landscaped area between
NCDOT right-of-way and the buffer zone near the rock
wall.
In the event the final plans for the replacement of
Bridge No. 76 (McDowell Street Viaduct) change significantly
from the public hearing map (dated April 16, 1993) and alter
the location of the roadway, replacement structure, or
retaining wall. or take additional right of way from the
historic properties. the Federal Highway Administration shall
consult with the SHPO and initiate procedures set forth at 6
CFR 800.5(e).
If, during continuing design review, them is a
disagreement between the parties to this agreement which
cannot be resolved. the matter shall be referred to the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for review and
comment, as set forth at 36 CFR S00.6.
If any of the signatures to this agreement determines
that the terms of the Agreement cannot be met or believes a
change is necessary, that signatory shall immediately request
the consulting parties to consider an amendment or addendum
to the Agreement. Such an amendment or addendum shall be
executed in the sarie manner as the original agreement.
Execution of,this Memorandum of agreement and carrying
out its terms evidences that the Federal Highway
Administration has afforded the Council an opportunity to
comment on replacing McDowell Street Viaduct in Asheville,
Buncombe County. North Carolina, and its effects on historic
properties. and that the Federal Highway Administration has
taken into account the effects of the project on historic
properties.
f-GICF e d
l
Highway Administration (Date)
(? )'kyl A FJM <7? - ?"' ". / " . I ?-
forth Carolina State storic (Date)
Preservation Officer
Concur:
,z-(-93
City of 'I-ksheville
Accept:
(Date)
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Date)
Appendix A: Historic Structure and Landscape
Recordation Plan
Photographic Requirements
Photographic views of the historic structure and
associated outbuildings, including:
-- Overall views
-- Each elevation, including distant Diems showing
the property in its setting
-- Details of construction or design
-- Views showing the relationship of the buildings to
each other, the road. and anv significant
landscape features
Format
35 mm or larger black and white negatives (all views)
4" x 5" black and white prints (all views)
Color transparencies (all views)
All processing to be done to archival standards
All photographs, negatives, and transparencies to be
labeled according to Division of Archives and History
standards
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all negatives, prints, and transparencies
will be deposited with the North Carolina Division of
Archives and History/ State Historic Preservation Office to
be made a permanent part of the statewide survey and
iconographic collection.
One (1) set of all black and white 4" x 5" prints will
be deposited with the Asheville and Buncombe County Historic
Resources Commission.
1
60
"- o ? ¢ .•° :i a QI
' r-•-1 a
it ? Xx -
a- a-
'T Xf
-SBfiE LaG ;gF?X«S8 5
I, a-
'c m ?°o, c w e g b C; o 0
c y
ALE
? N ar
„ rc
r v
a
Z ?II

?. 8 K
W r
a r;.
N ?:Uw
j
'a J ° o -
a Q -
O
?
? F ?y
o N
I uo, ? -
m
J Z .c-.1-
°I
Q ? -
? N U s.
W • n ?-
• J

Q
O -- N
?

? Q
cr
V rl
v
- -= z v
W2, o U
cC v -
a m LLI
od Q
?o Z >
_` -
?U
Q3
c J^t s m
m
Y O ` ?
-, o U H
N 1 V
1 W
-c I .o1
•-,1 r -r.l,.l W
1 ? = W
r V
1 =S-4 g
1 J
fQa? W d
r O `
01
V IoAll.r F.

w 1 °'
-?
:•
#?`

- »
?o " o
E 2c
; ofi ']{
6ob-5
0" V•?C C?I)7, '?:'u«t fiy 4
0
O
0
_.`§ of 8
o
il
} f £?_ ? 9 o a _`h58 ?'?F?«°?? a bE=g?"g b Sb1?\??
?I
? - r
SYRY?
Rd€
8. 'b°'
k
.
• - ?
?E o
b?fi?b`
?.Yo?
?
rr .
i ? o
e o o

?xi? fiF p$ -
N
r.
V ? O f ?

?.?g •b?
s n.-
? ?? h u o` 'pp. o
N?OQ
o? ? GGGGG?
rfl-
?y J N
ED ??? gE 8• 'IW _ W
Y
• t °?` elt 8
a -

i ? ? J rl Y O
W
- of
•A 1110 l,•ulMi nlq 10 ,.I
.0t0° u1pn1 J. 1r•10 .(
ItIC`n W.1 n MMn110 1-r, 19
/l r 1 n/ I»111}111•.•.•,
-_ J
_i?t?2? •R/?
.9• .S
rp -
- Y
= Y a,
CC
u
J J fi
J -?
s =
?Z
s 2 X
? . 7
W?Ig
m
.
J
N
? W
?e
?m
V
W
N
K
J `
N
= W Y
ti G o
4 V O
N ? ,T
:y HE `-
Appendix B
,ro r
r)u) .•1 Or11f uxo.lee. -?
,Iro.ro1T
ATTACHMENT 2
NCDOT LAMP RECOMMENDATION
CN 130-822-01 6 BALLAST LOCATED IN
(CMS: L7D-BLK-EN2) POLE SHAFT
N
p 10450.)
(CMS: POLE-4"13?)
CN 104-w-03 (5- SO.)
(CMS: POLE-3BLX157)
CUBE FIXTURE TUBE BAIIAST
(SING O?UAD) CN 134-315-07
(CMS:.BAL--TUBE7)
SHOEBOX FIXTURE
CN 130-821-02 (CMS: L60D-BLK-EN4)
CN 104-583-05 (6' SO)
(CMS: POLE-6BLK307)
CAB.
TRAY ASSEMBLY
CN 134-316-06
(CMS: SAL-TRAY1000)
CN 133-161-05
(CMS: BXCT-RD-BLK6?)
BUTTON TYPE PC
CN 134-304-34
(CMS: PCIKW-BT)
CH 130-820-01
(CMS: L22D-BLK-ENT)
CUSTOMER OWNED
CN 104-577-03 NEW ORLEANS
(CMS: POLE-030?)
CN ID4-578-02 TRAFFIC POLE
(CMS: POLE-D30TS?)
CN 104-579-01 TRAFFIC POLE
(CMS: POLE-027757) -
10 DECALS

BUTTON TYPE PC
CN 134-304-34
(CMS: PCIKW-BT)
CN 130-818-07 (10OW)
(CMS: L90-BLX-EN 1)
CN 130-819-06 (150W)
(CMS: L18D-BLK-ENT)
BUTTON TYPE PC
(CMS: PCIKW-BT)
POWER PACK ASSEMBLY FOR N.O. do EVANSTON FIXTURE
CN 134-312-00 CMS: BAL-PP-9
CN 134-313-09 CMS: BAL-pp..15
CN 134-314--08 CMS: BAL-PP-22
D
CH 104-575-05 (12')
(CMS; POLE-0127)
1 -.CN 104-573-04 (16')
. (CMS: POLE-016?)
SEE NOTE 6,7
FOR FOUNDATIONS
EVANSTON
100W do 150W
FIXTURE
F= in
I I
SPAT-BASE (CN 104-643-021
(FOR NEW ORLEANS & EVANSTON
NEW ORLEANS 200W TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE'S ONLY)
EVANSTON 15OW (CMS: BASE-SPUT'TS)
NOTES;
1. THE CATALOG NUMBERS AND CMS ASSEMBLIES ASSIGNED ON THIS DRAWING CAN BE USED TO INITIATE A 106 FORM TO ORDER
NON-STOCKED STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE PARTS.
2. STERNER CUBE AND SHOEBOX BALLAST REPLACEMENTS LOCATED ON FAYETTEVILLE STREET MALL, RALEIGH. N.C.
A. CUBE, 175W, 120Y MV - CN 134-315-07
B. SHOEEOX, 1 DOOW, 120V MV - CN 134-316-05
3. EVANSTDN AND NEW ORLEANS FIXTURE REPLACEMENT BALLAST LOCATED ON DOWNTOWN RALEIGH REVITALJZATION PROJECT
RALJ3GH, N.C.
A. 12' EVANSTON IOOW, MPS 120V - CN 134-312-00
B. 16' EVANSTON 15OW, HPS 120V - CN 134-313-09 CPU
C. 30' NEW ORLEANS 200W, HPS 120V - CN 134-314-08 CAROLINA POWER & LICHT
4. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARMS ARE TO BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CUSTOM-.t DISTRIBUTION RALEIGH. N.C. 27602
STANDARDS CAN PROVIDE ASSISTANCE IN HELPING THE CUSTOMER OBTAIN TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARMS. 9RS 5. IF ANCHOR BOLTS ARE JST OR MISPLACrD. ORDER REPLACEMENTS USING CN 100-165-03
(CMS: BOLT-ANC) FOR THE NEW ORLEANS, JALVANIZED AND EVANSTON TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLES.
6. USE FOUNDATION ASSEMBLY FDT20X50OL FOR NEW ORLEANS AND EVANSTON POLES. 7. USE FO UNDATION ASSEMBLY FD73OXM FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLES,
ED BY CK'D AP
SCALE HOT TO SGIE PR.
DRAWN:cAm cuftom NON-STANDARD LUMINAIRES AND MAINTENANCE PARTS vlrc.
CK'D: HRM (RALEIGH DNISION USE ONLY) Appendix C
I DATE 3/1/91
CUSTOMER
BUTTON TYPE PC
CN 134-304-34
(CMS: PC1KW-BT)

? 7 I
I j 1 II
I ! i it I
f is ? i!Ill?tllll
1
I ' ? (111111,, I II If
!Ijil I 1 ?l???fi"!I ?? I II
.i
ill ?l 'II ?'li?l 11
11 ?' • ?' !i llf ' ?j. II
i ;.
J N N ,
Nj
N NCA MI
7 0 -1.
i
03??n I 1 ?J s?? I
?7. i?,l a.??W ?• I
• k,sor>.?I ?rz?o
• P ?I
J
III
?I
I?
`I i ? JI
II ? I
II ? 3
I \ ?i I, it
I i I ?I
I 'I II\
II III
!I I III
III III
III III
III I IN
III N III
III III
III
III o III
III ? III
III III
?? I
\\ III ICI
\ \ III I .II
? III III
? ? ? 'III III
o& ??\ III III
\, \ '°ob??J \ II ? III
?I ?I III
\ ? II I \ \ III
? IIi \ ? III
il? ? I\II
y I?
I\ \ I II
it I
I ,,\ III \\

\ \I II \
III
I \il
II I •?
I III .
III \
I III \
III I
III I
II I ,1
II \
III I
III I
. II ; I
III .I
II ? I II
II
I!
II
II
b
Q

y
i ?
~ O
1 ?i \ r J
i
I t
is
c, '( I,hvt

x
x \
/^I K
? rt\
w
i
x
////r''"'w..r. yr ??? I• \?•
I ? ? q
I
a `ilnNar+' o \
-C I , : o
,I oII II I
I II I
III ?:
r
r `,I ?? II I
r?
/`• '? I? ?? I S II 11 I z
r p
J y?
h
?\ ryas \

ATTACHMENT 4:
LETTERS OF CORRESPONDENCE
FOR SECTION 106 COORDINATION
f /4:r
JUN r
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources HIG ??'
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
June 3, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Historic Structures Survey Report for
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway and
Swannanoa River, US 25, Asheville, Buncombe
County, B-1070, 8.1841001, BRM-5000(6),
ER 92-8282
Dear Mr. Graf:
RESE
Division of Archives a'PTdiitvty
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of April 27, 1992, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the historic structures survey report by Suzanne Pickens
of Greiner, Inc., for the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and
offer our comments.
The following property within the area of potential effect is listed as a
National Historic Landmark:
Biltmore Estate: Gatehouse (No. 43). Biltmore Estate was designated
as a National Historic Landmark on October 15, 1966, and
automatically entered into the National Register of Historic Places.
The following properties within the area -of potential effect are also listed in
the National Register of Historic Places:
Biltmore Village Multiple Resources Area: Biltmore Village Cottages
(Nos. 9, 10). These properties were placed on the National Register
on November 15, 1979.
The following properties are on our state study list and considered worthy of
further study and effort towards a possible listing in the National Register:
McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76) (No. 1). The viaduct was
placed on the study list on January 10, 1992.
Asheville High School (Nos. 4,5). The school was placed on the study
list on October 16, 1980.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we consider the viaduct and high school, as well as the
109 EastJones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
June 3, 1992, Page 2
following properties, eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places:
St. Dunstans Historic District (Nos. 11-40, 42). Criterion C--The
district comprises a handsome and largely intact collection of 1920s
domestic architecture varying in size and style.
Biltmore Hardware Store (No. 2). Criterion C--The store is an intact
and well-detailed example of early twentieth century commercial
architecture.

Southern Railway Freight Depot (No. 41). Criterion C--The depot is a
fine example of railroad architecture with simple yet well-proportioned
ornamentation.
Until additional information for the properties listed below is provided, we are
unable to make a determination of their eligibility for listing in the National
Register:
Warehouse, Short McDowell Street (No. 6).
Warehouse, Meadow Road (No. 7).
Warehouse, Meadow Road (No. 8).
Additions to the Biltmore Multiple Resource Area.
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary
of the Interior. Specific concerns and/or corrections which need to be
addressed in the preparation of a final report are attached for the author's
use. Background materials and site forms should be forwarded to us for
entry into the statewide inventory.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sinc_rely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
Attachment
cc: "L. J. Ward
B. Church
Suzanne Pickens, Greiner, Inc.
ATTACHMENT
Historic Structures Survey Report for
Bridge No. 76 over Southern Railway and Swannanoa
River, US 25, Asheville, Buncombe County,
B-1070, 8.1841001, BRM-5000(6), ER 92-8282
General Comments:
Overall, we feel that the report represents a thorough survey of the area of
potential effect. Also, the "Architectural and Historical Background" section
and the maps provided throughout the report are very good.
Specific Comments:
1. Additions to the Biltmore Village Multiple Resources Area. Though it is
not necessary to draft an amendment to this nomination, we do need
written information addressing which buildings appear to qualify for
National Register listing and why. The statement on page 79 indicates
that there are "several additional buildings which should qualify for
inclusion." These buildings, including 34 All Souls Crescent, are located
in the area of potential effect and should be specifically identified and
evaluated for National Register-eligibility in the report.
2. McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76) (No. 1). We feel that the
viaduct is also eligible in the area of transportation under Criterion A. It
is important to address the additional questions of did the viaduct
replace an earlier bridge, and had the Biltmore Avenue Bridge been the
only link between *Asheville and Biltmore?
3. Asheville High School (Nos. 4, 5). On pages 2, 24, and 52 the report
should note that the high school is on the state study list.
4. St. Dunstans Historic District (Nos. 11-40, 42). We concur with the
boundaries shown except for the inclusion of the Queen Anne style
house on Grindstaff Place (No. 40). The building is outside the district's
apparent period of significance and is too altered to be considered a
contributing element of the district for individual distinction. Since the
house is at the edge of the district, the boundaries should be redrawn to
omit it.
Also, we note some discrepancies between the report's inventory
descriptions and the actual properties. We have listed below the
property's inventory number with corrections and/or questions.
No. 16a: This property needs to be described in the inventory.
No. 17: Is this rustic siding original or from the 1960s?
No. 19: Exterior material is wide German siding, not weatherboard.
No. 21: Aluminum siding, not weatherboard, is above the asbestos
shingles.
2
No. 23: The shed-roofed dormer is sheathed in vinyl siding. The
two-story stone outbuilding on property. From the
photograph provided, the house appears to be one-and-one-
half stories, not two stories.
No. 24: This 1945 structure is noncontributing. The house is
stuccoed rather than light-colored brick. The flue is brick.
No. 27: This house is one-and-one-half stories as indicated by the
full-size windows in the side gables.
No. 28: The end gable is covered in aluminum siding, not
weatherboard. Perhaps this structure may be
noncontributing due to this and the severely altered porch.
.
No. 29: This structure is noncontributing due to the drastic
alterations--entire gable roof porch section added to a hip
roof house, stone veneer, and new windows.
No. 30: Exterior sheathing is German siding, not weatherboard.
No. 32: Exterior sheathing is aluminum siding, not weatherboard.
No. 33: Stone chimneys and stone wall are worthy of mention.
No. 36: Outbuilding and car shed should be noted.
No. 37: Outbuilding should be noted.
No. 38: Exterior sheathing is vinyl siding, not weatherboard. Garage
should be noted.
No. 39: Exterior sheathing is aluminum siding, not weatherboard.
No. 42: The street number is 28. The exterior sheathing is German
siding, not weatherboard.
5. Warehouses (Nos. 6, 7, 8). We need a written description and
evaluation for each warehouse before we can make a determination of
their eligibility.
?? ?. sr?rFq
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
August 26, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Historic Structures Survey Report for Bridge No.
76 over Southern Railway and Swannanoa River,
US 25, Asheville, Buncombe County, B-1070,
8.1841001, BRM-5000(6), ER 93-7153
Dear Mr. Graf::
1! ,
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
?C, E
a
AUG 3I1
DM51GN OF U-
??gL HIGHWAYS
&ESEA
Thank you for your letter of July 28, 1992, transmitting the corrected pages to the
historic structures survey report by Suzanne Pickens of Greiner, Inc., concerning
the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following property is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
34 All Souls Crescent (addition to the Biltmore Village MRA). Criterion C--
The cottage represents the broad use of Richard Sharp Smith's design
motifs for Biltmore Village.
Until additional information for the properties listed below is provided, we are
unable to make a determination of their eligibility for the National Register:
Warehouse No. 6
Warehouse No. 7
Warehouse No. 8
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior. Specific concerns and/or corrections which need to be addressed in
the preparation of a final report are attached for the author's use.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East ones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
August 26, 1992, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
SipcereJ
David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw
Attachment

Preservation Officer
cc: `-CJ. Ward
B. Church
Suzanne Pickens, Greiner, Inc.
ATTACHMENT
Historic Structures Survey Report for Bridge No. 76
over Southern Railway and Swannanoa River,
Asheville, Buncombe County, B-1070,
8.1841001, BRM-50000(6), ER 93-7153
1. Warehouses (Nos. 6, 7, and 8). Please provide a description and evaluation
for each warehouse so that we can make a determination of their eligibility.
These properties are located within the area of potential effect and were
listed in the original report.
2. St. Dunstans Historic District (Nos. 11-39, 42). As stated in our June 3,
1992 letter, we concur that this district is eligible for National Register
listing. We have the following comments regarding individual structures:
No. 29: We continue to believe that this property is noncontributing. The
report's description does not convey the extensive alterations which have
taken place--entire gable roof section added to a hip roof house, stone
veneer, and new windows.
In addition, please note for your files that the Photographic Inventory, June
10, 1992, incorrectly identifies two structures. The photograph labeled
"No. 27, 72 St. Dunstans Circle" should be labeled "No. 29, 92 St.
Dunstans Circle," and visa versa. Also, the correct address for No. 42 is 28
Roebling Circle.
d STAIZ o
K [t
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
September 22, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 76 over Swannanoa River,
Asheville, Buncombe County, B-1070, BRM-
5000(6), 8.1841001, ER 93-7336
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of September 4, 1992, concerning the above project.
We have received the preliminary documentation provided to us to determine the
effect of this undertaking on historic properties located in the area of potential
effect. Upon initial review, we have determined that we need the following
additional information:
An enlarged detail of the realignment of the McDowell Street and Lodge
Street intersection. The drawing should show the existing roadway, right-of-
way, and 70' perpetual easement and the new roadway alignment in relation
to the Biltmore Estate National Historic Landmark boundary, and the portion
of the estate's structures in the area of potential effect.
2. What kind of improvements will be done to the drainage facilities at the
Asheville High School? Other than the acquisition of a permanent easement
(rather than a temporary one), how will the drainage improvements differ
from the existing conditions? Also, please provide a drawing showing the
location of the improvements and the easement on the Asheville High School
property.
As indicated in our August 26, 1992, letter we need additional information for
three of the properties in the historic structures survey report for this project.
Once we have completed our review of the report and received the above
information, we will comment on the project's effect upon National Register-listed
and eligible properties.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
September 22, 1992, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 91.9/733-4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: L. J. Ward
, ?: Church
STAIZ
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
January 6, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Addendum to the Historic Structures Survey
Report for replacement of Bridge No. 76 over
Southern Railway and Swannanoa River, Asheville,
Buncombe County, B-1070, 8.1841001, BRM-
5000(6), ER 93-7930
Dear Mr. Graf:
Z UqN o
Z 8 Ir';
,I
;o rs 1Vq l
Division ofA-R?Mee- and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of December 21, 1992, transmitting the addendum to
the historic structures survey report by Suzanne Pickens for Greiner, Inc.,
concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following properties are not eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places since they have undergone numerous character-altering
changes:
Warehouse No. 6
Warehouse No. 7
Warehouse No. 8
Please note, we are still awaiting original photographs of the structures over fifty
years of age which were not addressed in the report.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
-4
109 East ones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
January 6, 1993, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
\c -,max . ?u .??-?? ?? --?C?.
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: L. J. Ward
B. Church
Suzanne Pickens

fJ
ar`
41
L• North Carolina Department .of Cultural %ces
c?- 0 E ^V
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor Division or Archives anJ History
Belly Ray McCain, Secretary FWill?rrt, S,?i?e, Jr., Director
? C,, [?? UU I SAS
January 22, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 76 over Swannanoa River,
Asheville, Buncombe County, B-1070, BRM-
5000(5), 8.1841001, ER 93-7336
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of January 7, 1993, and the additional information
concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the preliminary documentation provided to us to determine the
effect of this project on historic architectural properties located within the area of
potential effect. We concur with the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's (NCDOT) determinations of effect upon National Register-listed or
eligible properties except for the No Effect finding upon the St. Dunstan's Historic
District due to the removal of vegetation and cutting into the hillside. Instead, we
believe that these actions may have No Adverse Effect upon the historic district if
certain measures to minimize harm are employed.
Below is a list of the National Register-listed or eligible properties along with our
determinations of effect upon each property:
McDowell Street Viaduct (Bridge No. 76)
Adverse Effect. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) will be needed to
address this adverse effect and the one that follows.
St. Dunstan's Historic District
Adverse Effect due to the destruction of a contributing property, the
removal of vegetation, and cutting into the hillside. This Adverse Effect will
need to be addressed in the MOA with stipulations to protect the stone wall
which borders the district, provide appropriate landscaping to maintain the
district's residential atmosphere, and mitigate the loss of the house.
109 Gist Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
January 26, 1993, Page 2
For the following properties, we concur with the No Effect finding:
Biltmore Hardware Store
Southern Railway Freight Depot
Biltmore Multiple Resource Area: 32 All Souls Crescent
Ashovillo High School
Biltmore Estate: Gatehouse
Please note, we would like to review the final design for the new McDowell Street
Bridge and the design for the traffic signal located at the entrance to the Biltmore
Estate.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely, /
/David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw

cc: J. Ward
B. Church
Y .
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division or Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
May 18, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf t(i G E VlC
Division Administrator Q'
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
MAY 2 4 1993
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-14422
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 76 on US 25 over Z? DIVISION OF Q?
Swannanoa River and Southern Railway, Asheville, G'Cc? HIGHWAYS
Buncombe County, B-1070, 8.1841001, BRM- FNORONN?E?
5000(6), ER 93-8728
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of April 21, 1993, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) (with its appendixes)
for the above project which will adversely affect the McDowell Street Viaduct and
the St. Dunstan's Historic District, properties eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places and protected under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. We believe it adequately addresses our concerns
regarding the historic properties. As state historic preservation officer, I have
signed and dated the MOA. As requested, I am returning the MOA with the
appendixes and the public hearing map.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
William S. Price, Jr.
State Historic Preservat on Officer
WSP:sIw
Enclosures
cc: X/J. Ward
B. Church
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807